The Lunacy of People Assessment


The Lunacy of People Assessment

A thought occurred to me recently. If your organisation measured growth in sterling for the first quarter, US Dollars for the second, Yen for the third and Euros for the fourth would you think this a sensible idea? When your children were growing up did you measure their height in centimeters, then inches then centimeters again? Would you find it odd if your sat nav gave distances in miles and then kilometers and then back to miles again and then for special treat measured the last section of the journey in furlongs? So why do we use so many different assessments for people development?

I work with organisations who use one assessment for beginners in an organization, another for aspiring leaders, another for teams and yet another for senior executives. The reason for this is probably simple – traditionally there has been no one assessment that has offered a complete talent solution. I have sometimes heard HR professionals say that as people progress through the organization they want to be able to offer ‘something different’ as if its special to change the yardstick in some way. Traditionally assessments measure a ‘moment in time’ and don’t offer the analytics that current, more progressive assessments offer which perhaps is the reason for the wide offering and a reluctance to change keeps people rooted in such thinking.

Going forward analytics in the HR field are going to become prominent in organizational development. HR specialists are now able to offer the analytics to –

· Match people accurately to specific roles

· Assess retention and engagement expectations to enable organiastions to keep their talented staff

· Develop talent through every level of management and leadership

· Develop teams that are able to work effectively together

· Create cultures that are progressive and in line with the strategic goals of the organization

· Use emotional intelligence assessment to design personal development plans

· Assess behavioural and leadership competencies in line with the organisations expectations.

· Create a succession planning system to match prospective candidates to roles quickly and effectively

· Assess cultural behaviours in teams and groups to ascertain the impact on productivity and design necessary adjustment programmes

It makes sense therefore to choose a yardstick which is going to give like for like comparisons along the way – one that has been thoroughly researched, is highly accurate and benchmarked against excellent performance not norms as is the traditional approach.

If you would like to know more about the unique Harrison Assessment Talent Solution which can provide all of the above do get in touch.

Pat Hutchinson, Quadrant 1 International Ltd,