Search

Ratings from an operational assessment centre (AC) were examined as a function of the order that candidates participated in the assessments. Assessment scheduling had a significant multivariate effect on the preconsensus exercise-based ratings. The effect was small, however, accounting for at most 1% of the rating variance. Differences in exercise order were seen as being unlikely to result in serious unfairness to applicants, although programme designers should be sensitive to the possibility of early vs. late-day performance differences., The assessment centre (AC) method has been used for many years to help make a variety of employment decisions (Thornton, 1992). Use of the method typically requires that candidates participate [...]

Overall previous research has found assessment centres to have low construct validity. Criticism of the analytical procedures used in such research have stimulated a re-evaluation of this issue. In the present study we have examined two variables whose influence on assessment centre construct validity has been neglected. These variables are assessor type (or profession, i.e. psychologist or manager) and the number of distinguishable dimension categories required to adequately represent the ratings. Using Marsh's (1989) approach to confirmatory factor analysis for the assessment centre ratings, we have found that two different models fit the psychologist and manager data. While all the predetermined dimensions were reflected in the psychologists' ratings (i.e. high construct validity), only two broad dimension categories: performance skills and interpersonal skills, accounted for the managers' ratings. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed., The increased popularity of the assessment centre (AC) in recent years stems partly from its high criterion related validity (Gaugler, Rosenthal, Thornton & Bentson, 1987; McEvoy & Beatty, 1989; Tziner, [...]