We need YOUR help – New ECC test enters validation phase
YOU ARE KEY – We can’t do it without you…
If you had not yet heard we are hard at work on bringing you 3 new entry-level Emergency Communication Center (ECC) tests. As you know all of our tests go through a thorough validation phase that gets documented in the free Technical Report available with every test. Now your agency can be a part of the process, have a test with direct evidence for use within your organization, and enjoy a deep discount on your next test order (plus other benefits).
All the detailed information can be found on our ECC Validation page. But to summarize, we’d need your to get together a group of your incumbent ECC staff to take the test, then have their first and second line supervisors fill out a brief evaluation for each incumbent taking the test. If you can’t commit to a large group, that’s OK, even 5-6 staff can make a huge difference if multiple agencies get on board.
If you’d like more information or want to participate, fill out the form below:
[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]Thoughts on Adverse Impact: Part 2
In my previous post, Thoughts on Adverse Impact Part 1, I offered my suggestions on how to plan and think about an adverse impact study. Summarizing and reviewing some of my main points:
From the Practitioner Perspective, adverse impact involves a technology, not a science.
- The ways in which we prepare for, calculate, and interpret the results of an adverse impact analysis are guided primarily by the Uniform Guidelines and case law, as opposed to strict principles of statistics.
- Adverse Impact can be defined as practical or significant differences in selection rate as a function of protected group status.
In this month’s blog, I deal with more commonly discussed issues, such as various approaches to quantifying adverse impact and the sequencing of tests. Again, as a caution, this blog does contain my opinions on a controversial topic. In addition, although I have tried to simplify the discussion, this is a complex topic and it would be difficult enough to explain in a long article or book, let alone a blog.
Distinguishing Between Adverse Impact and Subgroup Differences
Although adverse impact and subgroup differences between protected classes are distinct concepts, the two terms are often used interchangeably, not only in the practitioner literature but by experts who should know better. In order to appreciate some of the issues in the analysis of adverse impact, one must first develop an understanding of the difference between these two frequently confused concepts. (more…)
Thoughts on Adverse Impact: Part 1
- If your head hurts just thinking about adverse impact. Cheer up, you are not alone.
A long time ago, I had an international student ask me why my class was not titled Thoughts of Professor Doverspike; in her country, all classes were simply listed as Thoughts of Professor _____. I have always thought that was a wonderful idea and so this month’s blog is Thoughts on Adverse Impact (actually, I originally titled it Thought on Adverse Impact, but I was unsure whether that was a typo, a Freudian slip, or an accurate depiction of my limited cognitive ability).
I have spent most of my professional life, which now amounts to over 35 years, dealing with adverse impact issues. During this time period I have found that most human resource professionals, from the novice to the experienced employment attorney, struggle when it comes to understanding even the basics of adverse impact.
From the Practitioner Perspective, adverse impact involves a technology, not a science. Thus, in my opinion, the ways in which we prepare for, calculate, and interpret the results of an adverse impact analysis are guided primarily by the Uniform Guidelines and case law, as opposed to strict principles of statistics. Therefore, after offering a brief definition and thoughts on technology, I first offer up my suggestions on how to plan and think about your adverse impact study. In my next blog, I will deal with more commonly discussed issues, such as various approaches to quantifying adverse impact, the sequencing of tests, and the interpretation of results.
As a serious caution, this blog does contain my opinions on a controversial topic. It would not be difficult to find other experts who might disagree with some of my recommendations and conclusions. (more…)
How You Treat Candidates Makes a Difference (Part 3): Navigating the Stormy Seas of Assessment
In Part 1 of the series, we discussed how public sector organizations can actively manage their reputations; in doing so, we concentrated on the general topic of reputation or image and its relation to selection strategy. In Part 2 of the series we discussed the effective management of four major functions:
- People.
- Technology.
- Selection Methods.
- Planning.
In our final installment, Part 3, I will concentrate my discussion on pretest and post-test issues. Given, I can only cover a limited number of topics, I have decided to concentrate on issues that interest me and major problem areas I have seen during my years in testing. This will include:
- Possible, and Impossible, Deadlines
- Recruitment
- Minimum Qualifications
- Reporting Scores
- Feedback and Development
- Evaluation
Given space limitations, I am not going to cover the test day itself or the actual administration. In part, this is because I have discussed some of the major issues in Part 2. More importantly, the topic of test day administration is already covered in detail in a number of excellent publications available online from IPMA-HR; in particular, as I mentioned last month, the IPMA-HR Test Administration Handbook, authored by Dianna E. Belman, and edited by Toni Kovalski, Bruce Davey, and Andrey Pankov. This valuable resource can be found for free at the IPMA-HR Assessment Services website. Tests ordered from IPMA-HR also come with a Test Day Administration Guide, designed to assist with test day administration issues.
Possible, and Impossible, Deadlines
In my 30 plus years of involvement in public sector testing, including responding to many Requests for Proposals (RFPs), I believe one of the biggest problems is the setting of unrealistic test dates, which leaves the jurisdiction, and candidates, with too little time to prepare for the test.
For example, a civil service commission tells me they want to give a promotional test for manager on December 6th. Do I have enough time? Working backwards and simple math provide me with an answer.
First, for promotional tests I should have a reading list; even for entry level tests I may want to provide some type of preparatory material that the candidates can read. At a minimum, I should give the candidates 60 days to read the materials and prepare. Depending on availability, it may take another couple of weeks to obtain the source documents. Of course, I have to put together the reading list, or select the test with its accompanying reading list. Those decisions should be made based upon the completion of my job analysis, which might take another month. Conservatively then, I should have 4 months or 120 days between the request from the civil service commission for a test administration and the date of the test; six months would be even better and allow time for handling various unexpected issues that arise. Therefore, unless I receive the request by August 6th, I am already in crisis mode, pointing out the need to educate your civil service commission or operating departments to the realities of assessment. (more…)
Price Drop On Entry-Level Dispatch and Correctional Officer Tests
We are hard at work on putting the finishing touches on our 2015 catalog of test products and services. We’ll also have some updated pricing to announce for 2015, but to prepare for that we are announcing today that we have reduced the per candidate price for two of our entry-level tests, the Entry-Level 911 20 with Video for dispatchers and the CO-EL 201 (TIP) for correctional officers.
| Test Name | Old Price | New Price |
|---|---|---|
| EL-911 20 (Video) | $12.50 | |
| CO-EL 201 (TIP) | $12.50 |
Prices listed above are per candidate.
This brings pricing parity across our whole line of entry-level Emergency Communication Center and Correctional Officer tests. All of our tests for those positions are now priced at $12.50 per candidate.
If you had not previously considered either of these tests for your hiring needs, please contact us at assessment@ipma-hr.org or by phone at (800) 381-8378 to ask for an inspection copy, which are available to Test Security Agreement signers at no cost.
How You Treat Candidates Makes a Difference (Part 2): Managing the Four Critical Elements
- The devil is in the details.
- The best laid schemes of mice and men, often go awry (Robert Burns).
- Expect the unexpected.
- If there is a 50-50 chance that something can go wrong, then 9 times out of ten it will (Paul Harvey).
The creation of a positive, engaging client experience is dependent on the effective management of four major functions:
- People.
- Technology.
- Selection Methods.
- Planning.
In this month’s blog, I will discuss the administration of each of these essential variables. In my view, most public sector agencies already do a good job of managing these critical factors; however, winning the ARMS race and creating a winning brand image require going beyond good enough to excellent. Furthermore, as the four classic quotes above suggest, even the best managed selection program can be derailed by unsuspected crises. Thus, not only must assessment departments excel in management, they must build into the system sufficient checks and redundancies so as to deal with all of the unexpected emergencies that are likely to occur.
Last Month’s Blog
In Part 1 of this series, we discussed how public sector organizations can actively manage their reputations; in doing so, we concentrated on the general topic of reputation or image and its relation to selection strategy. We found that not only can a government agency’s reputation impact its ability to attract talent, but additionally, selection strategies can affect the image that applicants, employees, and the general public hold of your organization. As a result, assessment professionals need to monitor and take accountability for the candidate experience. In this month’s blog, we discuss how consideration of various critical functions can impact the candidate experience.
People
For me, the key to success is the quality, attitudes, and talents of the people involved in the assessment endeavor. Recruitment and selection require a high level of team activity and whether one wins the talent wars is a function of the enthusiastic efforts of every team member. Recruitment research supports this view, in that a consistent finding of the onboarding literature shows that the people an applicant has contact with make a huge impact on the image a candidate has of the organization. Whether it is the receptionist handing out a job application, an HR specialist arranging a time for an interview, or the personnel administering an exam, job candidates will judge your organization based on the attitudes and professionalism exhibited by the people they meet along their journey to possible employment. As a result, you need to make sure that all personnel involved in the recruitment and selection process are knowledgeable, well-trained and ready to project a positive brand image.
As the quotes preceding the blog suggest, the management of details is critical in the selection process. I know my own limitations – I am terrible at details. As a result, I need to have people working for or with me that are far more obsessive-compulsive than I am. So, I would recommend some self-assessment. If you are adept at handling minutiae, great, if not, you had better find someone to include on your assessment team that is detail-oriented and knows how to follow rules and meet deadlines.
When it comes to assessment, experience is another irreplaceable commodity. Over time, individuals learn how to handle all the various issues and crises that come up that could easily surprise and overwhelm a newcomer. Of course, it is important to not only learn from experience, but also continually improve one’s methods, procedures, and process. If you are new to assessment services, then conferences such as those put on by IPMA-HR are an excellent venue for learning from experienced veterans.
Within the confines of the length limits of this blog, it is impossible to deal with all the important jobs within the assessment function. However, I did want to discuss the issue of proctors, because I feel proctors are so important to a successful examination, but that role is often overlooked resulting in poor performance. Over the years, I have seen far too many proctors who stand in the back of the room and read, or even worse, talk loudly, fall asleep, or disappear for lengthy periods of time. If you were a test taker and you believed that a proctor was distracting and frustrating you by talking or snoring, what would your reaction be? What impact would that have on your image of the organization? Therefore, I would urge you to give careful consideration to your selection, training, and supervision of proctors. (more…)