Linking psychometric assessments and competence prediction
"People are all there is to an organisation" said Gary Hamel, author of Competing for the Future, in his address to human resources professionals on the topic of how to remain and become even more competitive in today’s complex business environment. What he likely implied however, was that competent people are all there is to an organisation.
The ever-growing responsibility of strategic HR business partners is clearly to attract, develop and retain competent people for their organisations in order to continuously maintain and grow their competitive advantage.
Take the following analogy into consideration: A medical practitioner purchases new medical equipment for his/her practice. The equipment is extensively tested and examined for effectiveness and whether it serves the purpose it is intended for – makes sense, doesn’t it? Why then has it been an uphill battle for human resource practitioners and psychologists to convince organisations of the benefits of assessing their ‘human capital equipment’. As psychologists, we promulgate and broadcast whenever and wherever we can the immense value of testing ‘human capital equipment’ for effectiveness before ‘purchasing’ it. The negative consequences of appointing the wrong person are costly to the organisation and a waste of time.
Much has been written about how the best people decisions are made right from the start. This is why the use of psychometric assessments in the decision-making process during recruitment and selection, as well as leadership development and succession planning has grown increasingly popular. The aim of using psychometric assessments is predominantly to:
- Allow science to inform and drive these decisions
- Increase the organisation’s ability to measure human contribution to the organisation up front
- Obtain real ROI on selection decisions and actions
According to www.criterionpartnership.co.uk, the benefits of psychometric assessments with regards to decision making in the context of human capital are:
- They are fair and objective – administration, content and output is standardised
- Can improve the effectiveness of selection decisions – easy to compare candidates and provides a rich source of information regarding their suitability
- They can predict job performance – research shows they are more effective at doing this than interviews
- Communicate positive messages about the organisation – indicates that the organisation believes their human capital is important enough to invest time and energy in selecting the best
- Effective as a sifting tool for high-volume recruitment – meaning more time can be spent on the candidates with the greatest fit
According to Schmidt & Hunter, authors in the recruitment field, sound recruitment practices now require a tangible and often defendable link between the method of assessment used in the recruitment process and its ability to predict future job performance. That is, the assessment methods on which the selection decisions are based need to have strong predictive validity. This is not just relevant to recruitment decisions, but also to succession planning and the identification of candidates who are suitable to take over the reins of key positions in the organisation.
Over 85 years of personnel research reports general mental ability (also known as cognitive ability) to be the most valid predictor of future work performance and job-related learning. The editor of Personnel Psychology, Frederick Morgeson, along with his colleagues, critisised the use of personality assessments in predicting job performance criteria, stating that the observed validities are low and have not changed much over time. In their criticism, they do however confirm that when discussing the value of personality tests for selection contexts, the most important criteria are those that reflect job performance.
The term ‘competence’ gained traction in 1973 when psychological theorist, David McClelland, wrote a seminal paper entitled, ‘Testing for competence rather than for intelligence’. Competence (or competency) is the ability of an individual to do a job properly. A competency is a set of defined behaviours that provide a structured guide to enabling the identification, evaluation and development of the behaviours in individual employees. On a more detailed level, one can differentiate between the technical competences (i.e. the set of job related knowledge / skills that are instrumental in the delivery of desired results) and behavioural competence (i.e. the set of behaviours that are instrumental in the delivery of desired results). The building blocks for competence are varied and may exist as a mix of the following:
- Job knowledge/ qualifications, previously acquired skills/ experience
- Capability / ability (cognitive / physical / EQ)
- Motivation / ambition / values
- Personal attributes
This is depicted as follows:
Building on to Morgeson’s and McClelland’s arguments, one can therefore take the position that the use of psychometrics during the selection process should be focused on predicting competence potential.
However, given the model above, this implies that different psychometric assessments measuring capability, personality attributes or motivation/values respectively, should not be used independently or as stand-alone measurements. They should rather be utilised in an integrated manner to provide a holistic picture of the competence potential of an individual.
The ‘mix’ between the different building blocks should also be reviewed in the context of the specific applicant to inform the predication of competence potential. That which an individual contributes in terms of motivation in taking a certain role, may be countered by a lack of cognitive capability. Another example is young candidates who possess the required cognitive capability, personality preferences and motivation, but lack the relevant experience. This makes it difficult to safely predict a high level of competence potential for a specific role.
To complete the picture gained from psychometric assessments, we suggest the use of simulation exercises. This adds the dimension of observing the displayed behavior for purposes of evaluation. Follow up with a qualitative feedback discussion in order to verify and contextualise the findings before finally reporting on the candidate’s level of competence potential.
