Posts Tagged ‘Simulations’

January 9, 2013

Sport Scouts Observer Performance, Corporate Recruiters Can Use Tryouts Too

Wendell Williams wrote an interesting article on ERE addressing seven common flaws in corporate recruiting practices. It presented a good sports recruiting and skill demonstration analogy.

Yes, recruiters are faced with the challenge of gaining insight to performance potential of someone they have never observed.

“HR recruiters in the corporate world don’t use tryouts, so they don’t really know whether candidates can do the job.”

Some organizations do.
The use of job-specific simulations, as a form of talent audit is a growing practice.
Organizations with high-population jobs find it easy to build a business case for the development and validation of simulations for pre-employment assessment of talent.
This in effect allows candidates to take elements of the job for a test-drive, thus producing a work sample that predicts on-the-job performance. In essence, they deliver a virtual job tryout.

Job Tryout - Can you cut stone?

In committing to the development of in-house, job-specific simulations, an organization resolves the seven counterproductive practices Wendell describes.

Companies who use simulations enjoy the same results of talent scouts in sports. They only invest the time to observe (screen/interview) those individuals who have produced evidence (stats) of their talent.

Companies using job-specific simulations have HR analytics to report a range of outcomes such as a 50% reduction in interview to hire ratios and consistently document the quality of hire as compared to the current workforce.

Readers interested in an overview of the technical merits of simulations for selection can read about a session from the 2012 Society of Industrial Organization Psychologists (SIOP) Conference Here

October 2, 2012

Get Your Game on: Parallels between the Gamification Movement in Training and the Virtual Job Tryout

Recently, Drew Robb wrote an interesting article in HR Magazine touted the benefits of gaming technology, or gamification, as an innovative method of training employees. While reading this article, certain parallels between gamification and Shaker Consulting Group’s Virtual Job Tryout became abundantly clear. The parallels were evidenced in many of the overarching goals of the experiences, as well as the guidelines given regarding effective practical application of technologically-advanced organizational solutions. Let’s take a closer look at some of the striking similarities between the two experiences.

The gamification movement was born from organizational desire to improve employees’ motivation to complete valuable training programs, as well as to get employees to maintain high levels of engagement during the training activities themselves. This desire also permeates the employee selection industry, with many organizations now choosing to utilize technologically advanced selection systems designed to increase the appeal of the assessments, with this appeal hopefully generalizing to the hiring organization as well.

The VJT employs realistic experiences in assessments to try and mimic many aspects of the job itself, with the goal of keeping applicants engaged, and also gaining more valuable information than self report scales or multiple choice questions could provide alone. While the increasingly realistic experiences within each VJT do help maintain high motivation and engagement among applicants, its effects go far beyond that. The VJT is framed in an interactive manner, specifically to help applicants gain a better understanding of the hiring organization. (see candidate feedback) The gamification article discusses the value of this practice, specifically the utilization of specially tailored narratives that allow the employees to learn more about their organization’s values and activities that reflect these values. The VJT has long capitalized on this valuable opportunity to give applicants a look inside the brand of the hiring organization, helping them gauge whether or not they believe they would be a good fit.

While many organizations have been quick to jump on the technology bandwagon, creating and administering selection systems that include simulations and other experiences designed to create that “wow factor”, the article on gamification imparts invaluable wisdom to those weeding through an increasingly saturated market for technologically-based organizational solutions: while technology may be what catches the eye, the scientific underpinnings of these systems still reign supreme. This is where the Shaker and the VJT have stayed at the upper echelon of technologically-infused selection assessments. Instead of merely employing a one-size-fits-all approach to computer-based assessments, like many in the field have begun to do, Shaker is constantly striving to improve the science behind each and every VJT we implement through rigorous validations and innovation targeted at not only improving the candidate experience, but also focusing on improving the quality and predictive abilities of the VJT itself. Important questions considered in the development of each VJT include things such as:

“Ultimately, what is the goal of this system?”
“What metrics are likely to aid in the achievement of this goal?”
“Who is the target audience for the assessment?”
“What will maintain engagement and motivation of applicants as they proceed through the system?”
“What methods can we leverage to ensure the legal defensibility of this system?”
“How can we leverage our expertise and past experiences to make sure we are constantly improving the overall effectiveness of organizations implementing the VJT?”

As the trend towards newer and better methods of utilizing technology to achieve organizational goals continues, Shaker and the VJT will constantly be at the forefront of innovation, continuously striving to seamlessly integrate the available technology with the critical science that goes into the development of valuable selection systems for organizations.

See a related article here.

Posted by: Jared Ferrell | October 2nd, 2012
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: Candidate Experience pre-employment assessment pre-employment testing Simulations Technology Virtual Job Tryout | Posted in Candidate Experience

April 26, 2012

Simulations Plus Other Assessment Modalities: Is the Whole Greater Than the Sum of the Parts?

SIOP 2012 San Diego CA

Three Shaker Consulting Group psychologists discuss the power of combining simulations with other assessment data for more predictive power.

Throughout the history of psychometric assessment, researchers have focused on discrete measurement modalities such as multiple choice biographical data, scale-based personality, and various types of mental ability measures. Researchers and practitioners have generally studied each modality individually, and attempted to show that individual constructs have a degree of reliability and correlate significantly with some outcome measure. As sample sizes and, correspondingly, statistical computing power have grown, researchers have also been able to examine complex effects such as interactions between constructs, though even these analyses are most often done within a particular assessment modality (e.g., examining the interaction between two personality scales).

Society for Industrial Organizational Psychology

Now, as computing and networking technologies continue to evolve at an exponential rate, nearly any type of assessment modality imaginable is possible to study and implement (Greene, 2011; Trull, 2007). As a result, novel assessment techniques are being developed faster than ever before. Today, simulations are at the forefront of modern assessment design and, as work samples, are known to be quite predictive of job performance (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). Yet, as a category they are quite heterogeneous.

This presentation will contribute to the growing literature in this area by examining two aspects of simulation design:

1. Whether measuring respondent behaviors during the simulation rather than just responses to embedded questions might confer a psychometric advantage.
2. How simulation measures may interact with other types of assessment measures, to better predict various outcomes.

Ultimately, as computerized simulation of the real world increases in complexity and fidelity, our science can move from creating measures of theoretical constructs to measuring actual behavior. In this manner, in time we may begin to transcend the need to measure proxy variables and theoretical constructs, and instead, use more direct measures of behavioral outcomes.

Simulations offer us a venue to ask many new questions that were not feasible and/or informative before. What can we learn, for example, by observing how a person interacts with an environment, be it virtual or real? For example:

• What do errant mouse clicks tell us?
• What do we learn when a respondent changes her answer?
• Can we learn something about a candidate’s personality by whether she skips over questions she doesn’t know, or spends extra time trying to get each question correct?
• Does repeating an example item during simulation instructions tell us anything about an individual’s personality?

In short, by simulating environments, psychologists can expand the measurement space from the traditional and simple question and answer, to a broad range of non-question-based behavioral measures. As simulations grow in complexity and fidelity, we may be able to move away from actual questions, and more towards measuring how an individual actually interacts with a particular environment; in other words, measure that individual’s choices and behaviors (Hornke & Kersting, 2006). At that point, our measurement focus will be on anything and everything that can be measured, from how a person moves through a space to what they actually do after making a decision.

While one simulation-based measurement advance is thus a gradual moving away from construct measurement to direct behavior measurement, another advance occurs as practitioners combine simulations with other assessment types. This allows researchers to measure interaction and other complex effects across measurement modalities. For example, we may find that a person with a high score on a multitasking simulation is better at a certain job, but only if that person also has a high score on attention to detail. Or, perhaps we will find that multitasking scores are only predictive for people who have a background doing work that involves multitasking. This type of cross-modality research is in its’ infancy, but it should increase as researchers integrate more measures in to online assessment experiences.

Psychological science has a hundred-year history of theory and research, but we feel that it has barely begun to tap its’ potential to explain and predict human behavior. Traditionally, researchers in our field focus on finding that elusive, “holy grail” measurement construct that can predict uncharted amounts of variance in job performance. We believe that this pursuit is ill-fated. Instead, researchers should explore ways to measure human characteristics with increasing fidelity, and in particular, move beyond paper-and-pencil measures of abstract constructs to actual direct behavioral measurements, especially in virtual environments. Furthermore, and especially with the vast amounts of data increasingly being captured by modern organizations, our science needs to focus less on the direct effects of measured variables, and more on complex and cross-modality effects. The latter topic represents a tremendous area of untapped opportunity for exploration.

References
Greene, R. L. (2011). Some considerations for enhancing psychological assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(3), 198-203. doi:10.1080/00223891.2011.558879
Hornke, L. F., & Kersting, M. (2006). Optimizing Quality in the Use of Web-Based and Computer-Based Testing for Personnel Selection. In D. Bartram, & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Computer-based testing and the Internet: Issues and advances (pp. 149-162). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262-274. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262
Trull, T. J. (2007). Expanding the aperture of psychological assessment: Introduction to the special section on innovative clinical assessment technologies and methods. Psychological Assessment, 19(1), 1-3. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.1.1

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | April 26th, 2012
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: assessment industrial organizational psychologist selection science Simulations SIOP | Posted in Conferences, HR Analytics, I/O Psychology

February 13, 2012

Industrial Organizational Psychologists – Uncommon Career, Uncommon Value

Kaitlin Madden, a CareerBuilder writer recently posted a list of the 18 least common jobs according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Number 6 on the list is Industrial Organizational Psychologist (IOP). Kaitlin also shares a BLS stat that there are only about 1,420 of them employed across the country. (This does not include the self employed IOP.)

Society for Industrial Organizational Psychology

Also on the list was the occupation ‘model’ . A colleague of mine, (an IOP), wondered: “How often do IOP and Model show up on the same list?” Great question. This might be the only occurrence. As it is reported, there are even fewer Models than IOPs. Both rare, but both have an impact on large audiences. Models are used to create engaging views FROM a large audiences – namely consumers. IOPs are used to create insightful views ABOUT a large audience – namely candidates.

Advertising professionals use a model in conjunction with consumer research to optimize market potential . Recruiting professionals use an IOP to conduct candidate research to optimize hiring decisions for performance potential.

IOPs are the experts who design and validate simulations for pre-employment testing and assessments. They are the professionals behind selection science. IOPs are the scientists that create the s coring algorithms for candidate evaluation and document the economic impact of staffing process improvement. In his recent post, Bill Kutik of HR Executive states HR professionals fear analytics. IOPs are the professionals with a Ph.D. in HR analytics.

Have no fear, we are here.

OK, so this is stretching an obscure labor stat into a blog post. I am as guilty as Kaitlin. However, according to the BLS, Ohio is one of the top five job markets for IOPs. And we have over 10% of that career market here at Shaker.

So, if you would like to talk with an individual who has chosen an uncommon career that can deliver uncommon value, give us a call. 888.485.7633

When it comes to HR analytics our figures are impressive.

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | February 13th, 2012
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: assessment industrial organizational psychologist pre-employment testing Simulations staffing process improvement | Posted in I/O Psychology

September 27, 2011

Is Interviewing a Waste of Time? Ask Kevin Wheeler

Candidate Evaluation Time Well Spent?

In his recent post on ERE, Kevin Wheeler suggests interviews may be a waste of time. He poked the nest and stirred up some good interaction. He also suggests, that the use of more objective methods, such as simulations for pre-employment testing can improve the candidate evaluation process.

At the end of the day, the hiring decision is an act of personal judgment. The interview plays a big role in supporting that decision. And suggesting that companies abandon the interview will fall on deaf ears. However, the bigger question is what methods and criteria are used to determine who to interview. With high applicant to hire ratios, getting to the best candidates, the ones worth investing the high cost of interviewing, is a place to put some considerable focus.

A note about the gap between interviewing concepts and practices.
I conducted a survey with SHRM and in 2006 published a white paper The Use of Objective Candidate Evaluation Methods. (Non SHRM members may write me for a copy).

Here are some stats.
55% of respondents stated they use behavioral interviews that are based upon questions prepared in advance. 40% of respondents stated they do not conduct interviews with prepared questions. Kevin most certainly has his editorial comments pointed at this group.

When I explored further, and asked who uses behaviorally anchored rating scales and numeric summary of interview outcomes. Only 24% of respondents stated they use of this known best practice. This is the group that Tom Janz (see comment to Wheeler’s post) may be using to support his retort.

Another way to look at it is this:
Every company interviews (bold assertion) in their candidate evaluation process.
40% of companies begin with no preparation for what they want to learn.
76% of companies have no structured way to evaluate what they hear.

I think Kevin’s assertion has more generalized weight about the current state of affairs than Tom Janz’s point (see comment to Wheeler’s post) about results that can be achieved when interviewing is done exceptionally well. The process that Lou Adler teaches is a great example. Lou demands adherence to the process to get the results he purports.

Kevin’s bigger point is that there are better ways to learn more objective information about a candidate. And thanks to Tom Janz for the reference to the Virtual Job Tryout as one example (see comment to Wheeler’s post). At issue here is the professional/technical capabilities of practitioners in talent attraction and selection roles and their ability and desire to build rigor, selection science, and discipline into their practice. Kevin is inviting a shift to more thoughtfully developed and objective methods for candidate evaluation. When your process obtains better candidate data, you may be able to make better decisions.

Thanks Kevin.

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | September 27th, 2011
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: employee selection pre-employment testing selection science Simulations | Posted in General, Surveys

September 5, 2011

Virtual Job Tryout Demonstrations at Taleo World

Shaker Consulting Group will be conducting demonstrations of the Virtual Job Tryout for participants at Taleo World. You will see how we create a candidate experience as unique as your brand, an evaluation experience as challenging as your job.

This is our sixth year as a sponsor/exhibitor at Taleo World. It is a great opportunity for us to connect with our existing clients on the Taleo platform. It also allows us to showcase our simulation for pre-employment testing to other Taleo clients.

If you are attending Taleo World, stop in and see us at Booth 23.

If you would like to read what some of our clients are saying about the Virtual Job Tryout, check out this sample of testimonials. The decision support from candidate results enhances the recruiter experience. Your recruiters identify best-fit candidates faster and build a workforce that delivers superior results.

We look forward to seeing your in San Francisco.

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | September 5th, 2011
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: Candidate Experience pre-employment testing Recruiter Experience Simulations Virtual Job Tryout | Posted in Candidate Experience, Conferences, News, Recruiter Experience

August 4, 2011

Eight Changes in the Apply Now Element of the Candidate Experience

The Internet has changed the nature of the Apply Now candidate experience. Paste your resume here is a thing of the past for companies leading the wave of change in how candidates get considered for a job. Leading edge companies are creating an interactive online candidate experience. In this new format the candidate can learn more about the company and the job while the company can learn more useful information about the people applying for the job. This article will help you understand how to obtain the most value from the Careers page of companies deploying best practices for online employment applications.

1. The Resume is becoming less important.
Job seekers put a great deal of time and energy into writing resumes, often seeking assistance to create a good looking and great sounding document. However, research shows that about one third of resumes contain misrepresentations. Tell your career story truthfully, recruiters check the facts. Recruiters use word search technology to indentify resumes with specific skills and experiences. Technology puts resumes in “yes” and “no” piles based on the word search criteria. Unfortunately, people use different words to describe the same experience. And, resumes do not contain objective information that can fairly differentiate between candidates. As such, companies that are most concerned with advancing the best candidates are developing online questionnaires to quickly gather objective, fair, and consistent information about you. The resume is best used during the interview, to guide the conversation in a manner that uncovers the value your past experiences will offer in the new position. Given a choice of completing an online application questionnaire or pasting your resume, go for the online questionnaire.

2. You are a decision maker in the recruiting process.
Sometimes people get a few weeks into the new position and say, “I didn’t know this was part of the job.” or “This is not what I expected.” When people have that reaction, they have a tendency to begin looking for a new job quickly. In essence, they may quit before they even begin. To help reduce this reaction, leading edge companies are creating what is known as realistic job previews (RJP). This is not a job description. A RJP is a detailed and balanced overview of the job, describing both the exciting as well as the demanding aspects of the work. When you have more information about the position, you are better equipped to decide if the job is right for you. Look for buttons on the Careers page that say things like: Job Overview, Learn more about this job, Day in the Life, or other indications that more detailed information is available. A RJP often includes videos, or pictures of people on the job and audio files describing what people find rewarding and challenging about the work. Take time to carefully learn more about the job and make an informed decision about applying for the position.

3. Company culture impacts career satisfaction.
Each company has its own unique “feel”, it places value on certain behaviors and has a distinct management style. You may thrive in one culture and be stifled in another. Companies that want you to “fit-in” with their culture are providing an overview of their values, management style and performance expectations on their web page. Look for the sections on the web that are labeled: About Us, Who We Are, Working at ABC Co., Company Values. Be sure to look for information about career development, advancement, and what might be said about how they make working for their company a rewarding experience. Take time to learn about the company’s culture so you can decide if it offers the type of work environment you value.

4. Assessments add objectivity and fairness.
Almost 50% of companies use some form of pre-employment assessment to learn more about candidates. In most cases, this is a good thing. Assessment falls into several categories: 1. Work style or personality, 2. Reasoning or thinking ability and 3. Skills or Capabilities. Each of the three main types of assessments will be covered in more detail below. Because resumes are very subjective, and can vary so widely from people applying for the same position, assessment allows a more fair and consistent method for candidates to present themselves. There are well-developed standards for the use of assessments in employment practices and, for the most part, companies follow these recommendations, called: The Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Methods. These guidelines come from the EEOC and state any testing, assessments, and even the questions used during the interview must be related to the demands of the job, and must treat all candidates fairly and consistently. In addition, the company has to show that the assessment does not discriminate against applicants. If you encounter what seems to be an assessment, it will typically begin with a thorough explanation of what you are being asked to complete. Take assessments seriously, they are your best opportunity to create a clear picture of your qualifications for the job.

5. Work style or personality is a strong predictor of job performance.
How you go about your work, or your preferred approach for handling the day-to-day demands of the job is often called your work style. Questionnaires have been used for decades to help people describe their preferred work style. In the last 10 to 15 years much has been learned about measuring people’s preferred approach to work. A work style questionnaire will typically present one or more statements and ask you to select the one that best describes you, or asks whether you agree or disagree with how it describes your preferred approach. The worst thing you can do when completing a work style questionnaire is to fake your responses or try to guess what the correct response should be. In work style there is no right answer. What is most important is to accurately and candidly describe yourself. Most companies will have conducted research on which work style characteristics relate to effectiveness and satisfaction in the job. If you have those traits, you may be more successful in the job than those people who have a different style. If you try to second-guess the answers, you may end up taking a job you won’t like, because it requires and demands a different work style than you naturally bring to a situation. This can cause stress and job burnout. When faced with completing a work style questionnaire – be yourself.

6. Each job has reasoning demands.
Solving problems, interpreting information, composing communications are just a few examples of how thinking ability is required on the job. Internet technology has made it easier for companies to present candidates with a sample of common thinking challenges faced in day-to-day work situations. In essence, companies that use this method can get a small sample of how you will respond to the thinking demands of the job and at the same time, you get a sense of the nature of the work. It can be quite helpful for you and the employer to see how effectively you are prepared to handle the thinking demands of the job. Reasoning tests may be presented with a fixed time for completion, such as 10 minutes. This levels the playing field a bit, in that on the job we do not have unlimited time, so the company gets to see which applicants get the most correct work done in the allotted time. If you find yourself at the beginning of a test of your reasoning capabilities, read the instructions carefully, take time to study the sample questions and then work as quickly as you can. If you have time left at the end, go back and see if you can complete any questions you skipped. Your score will most often be based on the total number of correct answers. When completing an assessment of your reasoning or thinking skills, work quickly, and accurately. Most are not pass-fail so don’t stress out if you miss some.

7. Knowledge and skills can be transferable.
Computer and software skills, technical capabilities and occupational knowledge are valuable resources you can transfer with you from one job to another. As a best practice, more companies are asking candidates to complete a skills or knowledge test as part of the application process. If you can apply your education and training to the job better than another candidate, the company will need to spend less time and money training you. You can prepare for an online job knowledge or skills test by taking time to review technical manuals, certification training materials and the proper procedures for job-specific skills.

8. Test Drive the Job with Simulations.
The multi-media nature of the web now allows elements of the job to be recreated in engaging, interactive exercises. You may encounter videos or audio conversations that stop and ask what you would do next, or how you would respond. There may be data entry activities which evaluate your speed and accuracy on working with data, computer database activities which examine how well you can navigate and find answers, or even prioritization and delegation exercises. These types of simulations for pre-employment testing teach you something about the job demands and often portray elements of the company culture. Being asked to complete a simulation is an indication that the company takes hiring decisions very seriously. The effort to develop company-specific simulations ensures recruiters are able to identify and hire the most qualified candidates. People who perform well on the simulation are very likely to perform extremely well on the job. If you encounter a simulation, treat it like going to work for a day. Give it your best thinking and your most sincere effort.

Summary
The nature of applying for a job is evolving. Using Internet technology, companies and candidates can learn much more about the degree of job-fit that might exist. The more comprehensive the application process, the better the quality of the hiring decision for both employer and candidate. As more information is exchanged between the applicant and the company, both parties are better equipped to make a sound decision. This leads to greater job satisfaction, higher levels of productivity and a more competitive organization.

Online applications are a big win for everybody. When you encounter a comprehensive online application process, it is most often a sign that a company is working hard to: deliver and exceptional candidate experience, increase the objectivity of the recruiting process, ensure all candidates are treated fairly, and improve the likelihood you will be successful when they offer you the job.

Best of success in your career pursuit!

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | August 4th, 2011
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: pre-employment testing realistic job preview Simulations | Posted in Candidate Experience

April 11, 2011

Candidate Experience – How Candidates Want to Learn About Job Content, Part 5 of 6

This is part of a series connected to the Candidate Experience Monograph

We asked job seekers to rate the relative value of various forms of interaction for learning about the job. Specifically we wanted to have candidates direct us to formats for communicating job requirements that aligned with their learning preferences. Job seekers are decision makers in the process too. Creating a candidate experience that helps applicants learn about the job and prepare them to make a well informed career decision can differentiate your company in a positive way from other companies where the candidate may be applying.

The Top Three

How Candidates Want to Learn About Jobs

Job Seekers want to read about your jobs, listen to people talk about them and try their hand at some of the job tasks. The first two are obvious and certainly more traditional methods of communicating with applicants. And it is safe to say every company provides some level of written information about their jobs. Being able listen to people talk about the job is becoming more prevalent on career pages, sometimes at a high level about working at the company and in some cases very detailed information is provided about a specific job. This can take the form of Realistic Job Preview (RJP). Attempting parts of the job in a simulation came in as the third highest valued method for learning about the job. Simulations are an emerging format for both educating and evaluating candidates. Based on the 2009 annual assessment practices survey by Rocket Hire, only about 12% of companies are providing this level of an engaging and interactive candidate experience. This is up from the 5% level of use indicated in the Use of Objective Candidate Evaluation Methods survey I conducted with SHRM in 2006. (write me for a copy) The respondents suggest more companies may want to consider simulations in their candidate experience.

Write to Me
Candidates place the highest value on the written word. Communicating with text can be efficient and highly descriptive. However, as the highest rated format for conveying job information it places importance on the quality and clarity of the message. Soliciting job seeker feedback on your written messages may help refine how well you convey the opportunity, address common questions and create an emotional connection to the job.

I took time to read a few job postings prior to a meeting with a firm that invited me in to discuss their candidate experience. After scrolling down to the third screen of rather dry and boiler-plate job information, I was struck by the sentence: “We hope you find this job opportunity exciting.” I had to scan back to see what I had missed. While I was not remotely qualified or interested in the job, the writer had done little to leverage the written word to create interest, capture my imagination, or cause me to think critically if the job was a fit for me.

Go to your competitors and read their job postings. As you read consider how they use the written word to paint a picture of their jobs, position their opportunities, and pay particular attention to how you felt after reading. Writing well can create a compelling call to action. For some it may be to Apply Now. For others it may be Keep Looking. Either way, you win.

Talk to Me
Technology has made it easy to speak to candidates. One-way messages to educate and guide a candidate’s thinking about your company and your jobs can enhance the candidate experience your web delivers. Ease of deployment has opened the door for multi-media resources such as streaming audio with still images or high definition video are relatively easy to deploy on career pages now. It is important to invest the time and talent to craft messages that offer a balanced and candid overview. Candidates have the ability to discern between marketing hype and meaningful content.

YouTube is a treasure trove of highly effective and really poor examples of how to use media to talk to your candidates. Search: Realistic Job Preview. Watch a few from a candidate’s point of view. Ask yourself – How realistic?, What seemed to be missing? How was the balance regarding demands, challenges, rewards, satisfiers, learning curve issues, and so on.

Let Me Try It
Candidates are beginning to expect more than words and videos. They want a more dynamic exchange from the employment process. With the stratospheric applicant to hire ratios, human interaction has been eliminated for all but a few of the most qualified applicants. Job simulations can deliver a job-specific candidate education and evaluation experience as challenging as the job and as unique as your brand.

Simulated job tasks can deliver a highly engaging, interactive candidate experience. Candidates can take the job for a virtual test drive. They learn a great deal about the job. You get a work sample. When properly developed with validation analysis, the work sample may be able to predict critical elements of on-the-job performance.

Candidate testimonials about simulations suggest they feel better equipped to decide if the job is right for them. Recruiters are better able to compare candidates and indentify those individual better qualified to perform the job. It’s a double win.

While the adoption rate for simulations is still low, the technology for developing and deploying simulations is well developed. To learn about companies that have deployed a simulation, visit our web site to read about the Virtual Job Tryout.

Blog Away
Reading what is on the mind of potential co-workers and hiring managers is of moderate interest to candidates. This may be due the content being less about the job in question and more about the company or projects in general. Still, blogs are a form of communication that can have strong messages about career possibilities.

Cartoons are for Kids
Animations and cartoons were rated the lowest by candidates as a valued format for learning about the job. Candidates take their career search seriously. A medium associated with games and kids may not convey the level of professionalism a job seeker expects in their candidate experience. The message here may be to leave the animations to the gamers and Saturday morning television programming.

Part One, Part Two, Part Three, Part Four, Part Six

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | April 11th, 2011
Permalink, 1 Comment »
, Tags: Candidate Experience realistic job preview Simulations | Posted in Candidate Experience, Surveys

February 24, 2011

Patty Van Leer on Helping Candidates Make an Informed Career Decision

Candidates are decision makers too. Patty Van Leer of NAS Recruitment Communications understands that. I had a chance to speak with Patty at Taleo World. I asked her what we can do to help candidates make a more informed career decision. She offers three clear suggestions on what can be done to the candidate experience. Click PLAY below and hear what she has to say. Then scroll down to read more.

A good deal of the media in the talent space focuses on how recruiters and hiring managers make their decisions. Very little is directed at the candidate. However, Patty’s suggestions are grounded in core elements of best practices for selection system design. Let’s look at each of her recommendations a bit closer.

Provide a better definition of the job opportunity

Realistic Job Preview (RJP) is a structured, balanced, and candid approach for describing the job. Well developed RJPs portray the challenges and rewards, demands and satisfiers, expectations and opportunities both in the job and the company. When done well, RJP can contribute to an exceptional candidate experience and help the candidate make a more informed decision.

A well designed RJP serves two purposes:

Reduce unwanted candidate flow
Increase commitment and retention with new hires

RJP can help candidates achieve a deeper and more thorough understanding of the job. This will trigger a select-out reaction from a small portion of the candidate pool. Research suggests this might be in the single digits: +/- 5 percent. These individuals made a well informed decision that this is not the job for them and withdraw from the staffing process. This in turn reduces early turnover or false starts and saves a great deal of recruiter time.

RJP establishes performance expectations and defines in advance a range of demands that will be faced on the job. After the new employee honeymoon is over and the full brunt of performance demands arise, well informed employees say “I knew this was coming, it is not the whole job and they told me it was going to occur.” They also know those less rewarding or challenging aspects of the job will pass. The result is an associate that is willing to work through the tough issues and remain committed.

The negative consequence of UN-balanced or UN-realistic job preview is also two fold. The first is new hires who realize they have accepted a job they are not interested in either quit or perform poorly. The second is the ‘bait n’ switch’ reaction. New hires feel the company was not forthright in describing the opportunity. This undermines trust and also contributes to poor engagement and lower levels of productivity.

The proliferation of streaming web video and personal video technology has made it easy to create images and stories from the workplace. When done poorly the R in RJP is left off and the video becomes Hype, not Help.

Help Candidates See How They Fit the Role

A long standing and common recruiting practice is the workplace tour. What better way to give someone a taste of the job than a look around? This allows candidates to see the work station, feel the energy of the environment, observe and maybe interact with prospective co-workers. A tour however is a far cry from experiencing the job. Tours are also very time-consuming and may be disruptive to work flow.

Another long standing recruiting practice is the temp-to-perm hiring model. Individuals are given an opportunity to go through training, learn the skills and processes for the job. They provide a work sample over weeks or months to demonstrate their capabilities. If a new hire does not “work out,” they get terminated and a replacement is moved in. This remove and replace is actually a form of staffing waste and rework. If the new hire seems to learn well and perform effectively, they may get moved from contingent to full employee status.

This process is one of the most accurate methods of getting the best read on person-job fit. It is also one of the most expensive and lengthy hiring methods. One of the unintended consequences is a new hire perception that the organization is not well equipped to make hiring decisions.

An effective alternative to temp-to-perm evaluation can be a job simulation for pre-employment testing. An individual completes a series of exercises that mirror or even recreate a range of on-the-job tasks, demands, and typical interactions. Some simulations are more generic examples of job performance while other might be highly accurate recreations of elements of the job.

Simulations allow you to collect a broad range of work samples, work history, and work style data in about an hour. The results from simulations used for pre-employment testing can be almost as accurate as temp-to-perm methods of determining job-fit. Simulations by their nature give candidates direct feedback about job-fit, in part due to candidate reactions to the nature of the exercises. Overly complex, uninteresting, or under-challenging reactions can help the candidate make a more informed decision.

Explore Culture Fit and Hiring Manager Fit

Hiring managers have a lot to do with how culture is perceived and experienced in an organization. However, culture is bigger than any one individual. Culture is palpable, yet elusive. Companies work hard to describe their culture. Some companies are good at articulating and living their culture with clear intention.

Culture is driven by the behaviors that are valued and rewarded. As such, culture can be conveyed and evaluated through culture fit or values clarification and compatibility exercises. The mere act of discerning importance among a range of culture attributes is a powerful self-reflection for a candidate.

Candidates and recruiters/hiring managers can use the results from a culture fit exercise to dialogue along the lines of culture expectations, career motivators and fit. Hiring managers who are culturally self-aware and willing to candidly disclose their alignment with corporate values can provide the candidate with insights regarding their expectations for culture fit. That conversation can help a candidate make a more informed decision.

Career Change Motivators

In addition to the three factors Van Leer mentions above, providing candidates an opportunity to assess their underlying reasons for desiring a career change can foster a very dynamic dialogue. The Virtual Job Tryout can contain such an exercise.

Through a forced ranking process, candidates are invited to consider and contrast an inventory of job specific career aspirations and motivators. The result is a top down list of most-to-least desired outcomes from a career change. Recruiters can then use this prioritized list to explore and position the opportunity in relation to the candidate’s expectations. This gives both parties greater insights to making a well informed career decision.

If you are interested in learning more about how all of these elements can be delivered in a seamless and highly engaging candidate experience, call to talk.

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | February 24th, 2011
Permalink, Comments Off
, Tags: assessment Candidate Experience culture fit assessment pre-employment testing Simulations Virtual Job Tryout | Posted in Candidate Experience, Recruiter Experience, Videos

January 25, 2011

Get Your Game On! – Three Questions about Your Candidate Experience.

Game designer and TED presenter Jane McGonigal had an article in the January 22, 2011 WSJ “Be a Gamer, Save the World.” She states we (the royal We) spend three billion hours a week gaming. The average 18 year old spend 80 minutes a day gaming and extreme gamers spend up to 45 hours per week connected to a digitally delivered challenge. The quick lesson here is that engaging experiences hold our attention. The first question is: What kind of engagement does your candidate experience deliver?

Charles Handler, in his Candidate Bill of Rights suggests a candidate assessment should last no more than 30 minutes. Is that to free up time for gaming? Or is that because the assessments he is thinking about are a form of torture. Maybe he is seeking to limit the pain of a putting a candidate through poorly designed on-line assessments. He wants to limit (but not ban)– Applitorture. Or, the degree to which the applicant is subjected to mental or physical anguish from the act of applying for a job.

McGonigal goes on to suggest gaming can create a “blissfully productive” feeling. And that “When we play, we also have a sense of urgent optimism. We believe we are up to any challenge…gamers spend on average 80% of their time failing in game worlds, but instead of giving up, they stick with the difficult challenge…”

Again, a quick lesson here is that an engaging challenge, even if it is difficult and demanding, will hold attention, and maybe even attract attention. McGonigal supports this with asserting “..we like and trust someone better after we play a game with them – even if they beat us.“ The second short question is: What demanding challenge does your candidate experience deliver?

When done correctly the candidate evaluation experience can be demanding, challenging, and highly engaging. The candidate experience can be Applitainment. Or, the degree to which the applicant obtains amusement or pleasure from the act of applying for a job.

McGonigal has used games to solve world problems with EVOKE. And by her estimation believes if we spent about 21 billion hours per week gaming we can solve issues such as starvation, global warming and the like. The task of creating a game challenge for recruiting is far less demanding, but can be equally productive at solving a quality of hire problem.

By bringing a dose of gaming mindset it is possible to create an assessment that combines the intellectual stimulus of solving a variety of tough day-in-the-life problems, the social context of competition for the job, and a rich graphical experience that presents your corporate culture and work environment. And to quote McGonigal again,…”so many gamers feel they become the best version of themselves in games.”

Now, the third question, In what way does your candidate experience bring out the best of an applicant?

A universal question we get asked is “How long is a Virtual Job Tryout?” Followed by “We are worried about keeping it short.” Do you think game designers ever ask how to keep their user experience short? I think game designers ask, What challenges can we create?, What problems do we want them to solve?, What thinking do we want to push?, What environment do we want them to feel and sense?

We ask similar questions – What do you want to know about the way your candidate thinks, solves problems, and works with others? What do you want your candidates to know about your job, your unique company? A universal response is, “We want to know if they can be successful in the job and fit our culture.” Success is complex, so a simple candidate evaluation experience just will not do. To confidently assess job-fit and culture-fit requires robust candidate evaluation, the type of evaluation a simulation for pre-employment testing can deliver.

On average, Virtual Job Tryouts we have deployed take less than an hour to complete. One of the longer Virtual Job Tryouts we have deployed takes 75 minutes to complete. About 20,000 candidates a year complete it, vying for 2500 open positions as a medical technician. That translates into collecting more than 25,000 hours, or twelve and half (12.5) person-years of candidate engagement time to provide decision support for the hiring demands of one position. This company has rich evidence of which candidates can best solve their patient service challenges.

When asked about their candidate experience, here is what the applicants have to say:

98% Agree or Strongly Agree – The Virtual Job Tryout helped me gain a better understanding of the position.
95% Agree or Strongly Agree – Having experienced the Virtual Job Tryout, I am in a better position to determine if the job is right for me.
99% Agree or Strongly Agree – Based upon my experience, I will gladly tell my friends about employment opportunities at this company.

And after 75 minutes of applitainment, a survey asks for feedback and reactions to the engaging and demanding nature of the candidate experience. Here are some verbatim responses:

It was an awesome experience, it felt like I was actually working for COMPANY. Thank you for this experience I now have a better understanding of what is expected of me.
What a wonderful way to begin an interview process! I thought your virtual tryout was well thought out and based on the various areas you are testing, gives you a good picture of not only the ability to draw blood with appropriate equipment, but gives you a look into the candidates thinking process. All employers should do this to screen their candidates.
The Virtual Job Tryout was wonderful, I enjoyed the experience. It was very interactive and not nearly as dull as a paper test might have been. It kept my attention.
I was impressed with the Virtual Job Tryout. I felt like it helped me understand the job and made me very excited to have a possible opportunity to work for COMPANY!
Was a very good way to find out how qualified an applicant may be.

Simulations for pre-employment testing may not be on the same interactive plane as games, but they are a significant stride in the right direction. If you are not satisfied with your answers to the three questions about your candidate experience, there are options. Give us a call.

Posted by: Joseph P. Murphy | January 25th, 2011
Permalink, 2 Comments »
, Tags: assessment Candidate Experience pre-employment testing Quality of Hire Simulations Virtual Job Tryout | Posted in Candidate Experience, Client Case Studies

Categories

Recent Posts