9:31am Oct 21 at 9:31am
Assessing an individual in the workplace can be a valuable tool for assessing current skills, determining training needs, and planning for future advancement, but assessment should be conducted with caution and used as only one part of a constellation of data collected to determine employee performance. Generally, assessment can be aligned with a work-oriented assessment or people-oriented assessment (Murphy, 2010).
In assessing the way that people complete their job, a composite skills assessment, using data collected over a period of time using a variety of methods is the best way to assess work-oriented factors. Direct tests consisting of questions related to theoretical and practical application of the job tasks is the best and often the most cost-effective and efficient way to collect data, but has disadvantages in that it creates a testing pressure and may not accurately capture an employee’s abilities. Other ways to collect work-oriented assessment is by direct observation or questioning, but these methods are more labor and time-intensive and are not as objective as direct testing that has been normed to the employer’s standards for the job task.
In analyzing people-oriented factors, both competency and behavioral assessments can be used. Competency assessment can analyze cognitive abilities such as IQ and working memory, while behavioral assessments can analyze personality and psychology. Work ethic and emotional intelligence can also be evaluated using these methods. Drawbacks of these methods include the subjectivity of evaluating yourself accurately and the potential that strengths and weaknesses are organized into categories and taken as individual units rather than a composite forecast.
In using assessments for succession planning, all of the benefits and drawbacks listed above should be considered, and certainly, assessment should be just one part of a composite guide for who and how to plan for promotion. Assessment should, most definitely, be used as a part of any succession plan. Employees who have participated in the succession process indicate that assessment is vital to perceive the succession process as validated and unbiased (Kim, 2003).
References:
Kim, S. (2003). Linking Employee Assessments to Succession Planning.
Public Personnel Management,
32(4), 533-547.
Digital Resource: Scott, J.C., & Reynolds, D.H. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of workplace assessment. Retrieved from https://redshelf.com (Links to an external site.)
Monday Oct 19 at 5:12am
Good Morning Dr. Shoemaker and Course Members
There are a variety of vital decisions that should be made when deciding what to assess, however, the first decision is if the attention should be on the individual or the work. The stakes are specifically high when assessments are utilized to determine personnel selection and placement or regarding the development and advancement of people once they are hired (Murphy, 2010). According to our textbook, there are two generalplansof action for deciding what to assess in organizations: one gives attention to the work and the other is focusing on the individual (Murphy, 2010). It is probable to build assessment procedures around thethingsindividuals do in organizations in implementing the work roles or around the traits of people that affect what they do and how well they do it in the organization (Murphy, 2010). With work-oriented procedures, different jobs include different duties and tasks which may need a different type of skills and knowledge.
According to Murphy (2010), the hierarchical formation of the domain of cognitive abilities has vital implications for the interpretation of three key elements of cognitive ability tests that go as follow:
1.) The sustainability of the tests as predictors of job performance and efficacy.
2.) The correlation amidst ability for forecasting performance.
3.) Adverse impact.
According to Paese (2010), the problem with succession management is outstandingly complex in recent years.The contemporary challenge for organizations is searching for people with leadership prospects within thecompany and to increase the speed of their growth so the company’s overall leadership preparednessis amplified. Paese (2010) discusses the actions necessary forcompaniesto move from a traditional replacement system to a contemporary growth-focused system go as followed:
Alignsuccessionmanagement with business strategy.The target for leadership growth must a direct extension of the business strategy. Senior leaders should be directly responsible for the growth of leaders focusing on these targets(Paese, 2010).
Define success holistically for all levels of leadership. The leadershipdescription should be holistic. Any assessment of people shouldexplain the whole person and prevent the disintegrated assessment of leadership capability (Paese, 2010).
Identify leadership potential with a focus on the ability to grow.Acknowledge theleaders who display the strongestpotentialforleadership growth within the organization and speed up their development withthe hopes offulfillingleadership roles within the company.
Accurately assess readiness for leadership at higher levels.Paese (2010), explains that exposing the potential leader to different types of assessments that will be based on past and present performance.
Adopt a creative, risk-oriented approach to development.This includesplaying uponatime when a developmental path is not clear to develop adistinctive chance to leverage unpredictabilityand move towards generating anew opportunityand implement new skills or untested abilities.
Establish management accountability with teeth.This includes positioning management liability to make sure plans go through including objectives for learning.
Reference
Digital Resource: Scott, J.C., & Reynolds, D.H. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of workplace assessment. Retrieved fromhttps://redshelf.com(Links to an external site.)