abhishreshthaa
Abhijeet S
So far, we have been talking about assessing past performance. What about the assessment of future performance or potential? In any placement decisions, some prediction of future performance is necessary. How can this kind of prediction be made most validly and most fairly?
One widely used rule of thumb is that “what a man has done is the predictor of what he will do in the future” but suppose taking a man to be a supervisor and this person has never held supervisory responsibility? Or suppose you are selecting a man for a job from a group of candidates, none of whom has done the job or one like it? In this situation many organizations use assessment centers to predict future performance more accurately.
Typically, individuals form different departments are brought together to spend two or three days working on individual and group assignments similar to the ones they will be handling if they are promoted. The pooled judgment of observers, some times derived by paired comparison or alternation ranking, leads to an order of merit ranking for each participant. Less structured, subjective judgments are also made.
There is a good deal of evidence that people chosen by assessment centre methods work out better than those not chosen by this methods. The centre also, makes it possible for people who are working for departments of low status or low visibility in an organization to become visible and, in the competitive situation of an assessment centers, show how they stack up against from people form more well-known departments. This has the effect of equalizing opportunity, improving morale and enlarging the pool of possible promotion candidates.
One widely used rule of thumb is that “what a man has done is the predictor of what he will do in the future” but suppose taking a man to be a supervisor and this person has never held supervisory responsibility? Or suppose you are selecting a man for a job from a group of candidates, none of whom has done the job or one like it? In this situation many organizations use assessment centers to predict future performance more accurately.
Typically, individuals form different departments are brought together to spend two or three days working on individual and group assignments similar to the ones they will be handling if they are promoted. The pooled judgment of observers, some times derived by paired comparison or alternation ranking, leads to an order of merit ranking for each participant. Less structured, subjective judgments are also made.
There is a good deal of evidence that people chosen by assessment centre methods work out better than those not chosen by this methods. The centre also, makes it possible for people who are working for departments of low status or low visibility in an organization to become visible and, in the competitive situation of an assessment centers, show how they stack up against from people form more well-known departments. This has the effect of equalizing opportunity, improving morale and enlarging the pool of possible promotion candidates.