What is meant by predictive validity Why are assessment centres Essay

What is meant by predictive validity Why are assessment centres considered to have greater predictive validity than facetoface interviews - Essay Example In particular, the prevalence of the traditional employment interview as the primary selection method will be compared to the alternative methods of cognitive ability tests and biographical data. Whilst the assessment and selection process provides information for decisions by both the employer and the potential employee, this is not the traditional view as employment decisions have long been regarded as a management prerogative (Torrington & Hall, 1991). However, given the predicted skill shortages and the fact that selection is also concerned with the future life plans of individuals, the predictive validity of selection methods is an important issue (Meijer, 1998) both for organizations and for individuals. Predictive validity refers to the extent to which an assessment measure can predict subsequent job performance (Smith et al, 1993) such as error rate, production rate, appraisal scores, absence rate, or other criteria that may be important to the organisation. Relationships between assessment outcomes and future performance are expressed as correlation coefficients (r), where r = 1 represents a perfect relationship, and r = 0 signifies that no relationship whatsoever e xists. A correlation of, say, r = 0.4 is regarded as comparatively good in assessment and selection (Torrington et al, 1991), but this does illustrate that there are no methods of selection that represent outstanding predictors of future performance. In their survey of management selection methods used in French and British organizations, Shackleton & Newell (1991) illustrated that, although there was an increasing use of personality assessments, cognitive ability tests, assessment centers and biographical data between the years of 1984 and 1989, the traditional method of face to face interviews continued to represent the dominant method of assessment and selection in the UK. The format of interviews may range from totally unstructured where no objectives are set, to highly structured, pre-planned processes in which topic areas are closely related to job behavior, with varying degrees of semi-structure in-between (Anderson & Shackleton, 1993). Huffcutt & Arthur (1994) used meta-analysis to demonstrate that predictive validity increased as interview structure increased; the degree of standardization of questions and response scoring mechanisms resulted in validities ranging from r = 0.20 for less structured interviews to r = 0.56 for more highly structured interviews. Nevertheless, even highly structured interviews may vary in their predictive validity. In a comparison of situational interviews (future-orientated) and behavior description interviews (past-orientated) Campion, Campion & Hudson (1994) found higher validities for past-orientated (r = 0.51) than for

Business Law Conference Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Business Law Conference - Research Paper Example icials claimed that if they validated the results they could in turn be sued by a minority community for developing a practice that disadvantaged the minority groups (Supreme Court of the US 2008). The use of disparate treatment as an alternative to disparate impact has to be strongly justified based on evidences and reasonable standards (remedial action). The Judge rejected the claim that the Department did not discriminate but said that the Department was involved in making a decision based on race, which was more like disparate treatment. IF there is a conflict between disparate treatment and disparate impact, then disparate treatment should be avoided based on clear and outright evidences and standards. Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964: â€Å"Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 (CRA) and the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 amend several sections of Title VII.† By invalidating the results, there was an impermissible disparate impact, which in turn amounted to a racial preference, and was against Title VII. The Court gave a decision in favor of the 12 firefighters claiming that invalidation of their test results was a violation under Title VII. Another judge mentioned that the court failed to provide a clarification between the provisions of disparate impact under Title VII and the equal protection clause under the US Constitution (14th Amendment). Other evidences suggested that there were many flaws in the testing system adopted by New Haven, and if the testing system was better, the results outcome was have not been skewed. The court found the racial decision making adopted by New Haven Department as discriminatory and hence had to reinstate the results. However, it was also found that the testing system adopted by New Haven was improper compared to that of other Departments. However, this was not a basis invalidating the results obtained by the White