Premium
Assessment Center Graduate Selection: Decision Processes, Validity, and Evaluation by Candidates
Author(s) -
Jansen Paul,
Stoop Bert
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
international journal of selection and assessment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.812
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1468-2389
pISSN - 0965-075X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-2389.1994.tb00141.x
Subject(s) - salary , psychology , assessment center , selection (genetic algorithm) , predictive validity , situational ethics , personnel selection , performance appraisal , applied psychology , incremental validity , test (biology) , medical education , statistics , social psychology , test validity , clinical psychology , management , computer science , psychometrics , mathematics , artificial intelligence , medicine , economics , market economy , paleontology , biology
In this contribution, results are presented of research on the predictive validity of a procedure for the career‐oriented selection of graduates in The Netherlands. After selection on account of applicant letter, the selection procedure consists of four selective steps: interview with a ‘recruitment officer’, mental test, interview with line manager, and an assessment center comprising two situational exercises. Performance indicators investigated are present salary, average annual changes in function, appraisal of performance, appraisal of management potential, and average annual salary progression. We report on the relationships between the predictors, between the criteria, and between predictors and criteria. The assessment center, together with other steps from the selection procedure, appear to be valid for a number of performance indicators. The correlation between the overall assessment center rating and present salary, corrected for restriction in range, equals 0.55. Stepwise regression indicates that elements from all procedure steps contribute to the prediction of the criterion of average annual salary progression. The disturbing influence of possible ‘crown prince’ ‐effects on these results, are discussed. Also, the decision process taking place during the end meeting of the assessors is investigated. Finally, the evaluation of the procedure, both by accepted and by rejected candidates, is discussed. These and other results are compared to what is generally known about assessment centers.