To assess competencies, learning professionals - not just
performance professionals - must work with a competency model that
is measurable, one that identifies the competencies of the position
or job, as well as the behavioral indicators, behavioral anchors,
or work outputs and quality requirements.
Most often, learning and performance professionals will be given
competency models by consultants or HR professionals - or perhaps
even by corporate headquarters. Your task is to use the established
model to assess individual workers and compare the results to the
model. This process allows identification of the worker's
performance gaps and strengths. You will likely encounter six types
of assessments, each with its own special strengths and weaknesses.
Self-assessments
A self-assessment allows individuals to evaluate themselves against
a competency list with behavioral indicators, behavioral anchors,
or work outputs. If an organization has completed job-specific
competency models, an individual may have the option of choosing
one or several assessments of greatest pertinence to his career
interests from a large library of assessments. A tool for
reflection, self-assessments are useful because they can give
individuals clues about their areas of strength or weakness. An
advantage of this approach is that it is fast and does not require
much data gathering or number crunching. A disadvantage is that the
results may not be all that accurate because the data reflects only
the viewpoint of one person.
Manager assessments
Manager assessments are evaluations of a manager's direct reports.
The competencies included in the assessment come from a relevant
competency model (for current job or future jobs of interest). Once
the manager completes an individual's assessment, the results are
useful for creating targeted development plans and for selecting
current or future work assignments. Like a competency
self-assessment, an advantage of this approach is that it is fast
(it can usually be completed within 30 minutes) and with supporting
technology can be done with little or no administrative effort. A
disadvantage, like the self-assessment, is that the results
represent only one of many possible perspectives. Depending on the
types of competencies being assessed, this can be a significant
limitation. For example, if teamwork is a required competency,
wouldn't it be valuable to hear from peers who have been teammates?
360-degree assessments
Sometimes called a multi-rater, full-circle assessment, a
360-degree assessment collects data in a full circle around an
individual. The assessment may be based on a general (for example,
leadership) or job-specific competency model. These 360-degree
assessments have become a well-accepted, widely used measure of
competencies in part because of the inherent attractiveness of
comparing different perspectives to one's self-rating. Although not
easy to administer, a 360-degree assessment is simpler to develop
than some of the other ways of measuring competencies, such as
skill tests, assessment centers, and certifications. Using
competencies as measured by behavioral indicators or work outputs
with quality requirements, individuals are asked to rate
themselves. At the same time, other people - such as an immediate
supervisor, peers, subordinates, and possibly internal customers,
external customers, and suppliers - are also invited to rate the
individual's competencies. An average score is then calculated for
each group. Some 360-degree reports provide scores for each
respondent group, and some combine all the respondent groups into
one rating to compare to self-ratings.
An important assumption of the 360-degree assessment is that
greater objectivity can be gained when an individual's self-rating
is compared to the average of others. According to Max DePree in
Leadership Is an Art, every person is really three people:
the person you think you are, the person others think you are, and
the person you really are. By comparing self-ratings to ratings by
others, individuals can discover the mysterious "person others
think they are" and compare that to the "person they think they
are." This can lead to profound conclusions and possibly motivate
people to narrow performance or development gaps. It may also
suggest strengths that can be advantageously leveraged for oneself
and others.
A further advantage of a 360-degree assessment is that it can
reveal blind spots (the classic example is the supervisor who
incorrectly believes his direct reports appreciate his management
style) or suggest areas for improvement. It can also provide
information from more than a single source, revealing different
realities. (For example, an individual may communicate well with
peers but not with her boss.) One possible disadvantage of a
360-degree assessment is that it is subject to a variety of rater
errors (for example, "halo effect"or "horn effect" in which one
good or bad deed can exert excessive influence on an assessor).
Another possible disadvantage is that not all raters are equally
capable of rating people on behaviors linked to competencies
because some raters (such as customers) have infrequent or highly
focused contact with workers and may not observe the full range of
behaviors that the individual performs.
180-degree assessments
A 180-degree assessment collects data in a half-circle around an
individual. Using competencies as measured by behavioral
indicators, behavioral anchors, or work outputs with quality
requirements, individuals are asked to rate themselves. At the same
time, other people - typically an immediate supervisor and several
subordinates only - are invited to rate the individual's
competencies.
Some organizations prefer the 180-degree assessment over the
360-degree assessment because it takes less time and less
administrative effort. A disadvantage is that important
perspectives may be left out.
Assessment centers
An assessment center provides an environment in which simulation of
the work is performed. First, a job study is conducted to identify
what individual performers do and the results they achieve. Next,
raters are selected and trained to evaluate others. (Sometimes the
raters have performed the job.) The raters observe the worker as he
performs the simulations and then provide ratings based on the
observed behaviors or the work outputs produced as measured against
the previously identified requirements. Assessment centers have
been frequently used to measure teamwork and leadership skills.
When making selections of executives, or when assessing the
development needs of executives, assessment centers are often
useful.
Reference
Max DePree, Leadership Is an Art (2004)
Note: This article is excerpted from Competency-Based Training Basics.
2010 ASTD, Alexandria, VA. All rights reserved.