TABLE 5.

1
Common Assessment Center Dimensions
Identified by Arthur, Day et al. (2003)

Communication: The extent to which an individual conveys oral and written information and
responds to questions and challenges
Consideration/Awareness: The extent to which an individual’s actions reflect a consideration
for the dealings and needs of others as well as an awareness of the impact and implica-
tions of decisions relevant to other components both inside and outside the organization
Drive: The extent to which an individual originates and maintains a high activity level, sets
high performance standards, and persists in their achievement, and expresses the desire to
advance to higher job levels
Influencing others: The extent to which an individual persuades others to do something or
adopt a point of view in order to produce desired results and takes action in which the
dominant influence is one’s own convictions rather than the influence of others’ opinions
Organizing and planning: The extent to which an individual systematically arranges his/her
own work and resources as well as that of others for efficient task accomplishment; and the
extent to which an individual anticipates and prepares for the future
Problem solving: The extent to which an individual gathers information; understands rele-
vant technical/professional information; effectively analyzes data and information; gener-
ates viable options/ideas/solutions; selects supportable courses of action; uses resources in
new ways; generates and recognizes imaginative solutions
Tolerance for stress/uncertainty: The extent to which an individual maintains effectiveness in
diverse situations under varying degrees of pressure, opposition, and disappointment

TABLE 5.2
Common Assessment Center Dimensions
Identified by Rupp et al. (2003)

Cluster Definition

Problem Solving

Problem Solving After gathering all pertinent information, identifies problems and uses
analysis to perceive logical relationships among problems or issues; De-
velops courses of action; Makes timely and logical decisions; Evaluates
the outcomes of a problem solution.
Information Gathers data; Identifies and finds relevant and essential information needed
Seeking to solve a problem; Effectively analyzes and uses data and information.
Creativity Generates and recognizes imaginative solutions and innovations in work-
related situations; Questions traditional assumptions and goes beyond
the status quo.

Approach to Work

Planning & Or- Establishes procedures to monitor tasks, activities, or responsibilities of

ganizing self and subordinates to assure accomplishment of specific objectives;
Determines priorities and allocates time and resources effectively;
Makes effective short- and long-term plans; Sets and uses appropriate
priorities; Handles administrative detail.
Adaptability Remains effective by modifying behavioral style to adjust to new tasks, re-
sponsibilities, values, attitudes, or people; Shows resilience in the face
of constraints, frustrations, or adversity.

(Continued)
79
 TABLE 5.2
(Continued)

Cluster Definition

Stress Tolerance Maintains composure and performance under pressure, opposition, tight
time-frames, and/or uncertainty; Directs effort to constructive solutions
while demonstrating resilience and the highest levels of professionalism.
Conscientious- Works efficiently and consistently toward goals with concern for thorough-
ness ness; Consistently meets deadlines and expectations; Displays concentra-
tion, organization, and attention to detail; Thinks carefully before acting.
Motivation Originates action rather than passively accepting or responding to events;
Demonstrates capacity for sustained effort over long time periods until the
desired objective is achieved or is no longer reasonably attainable; Ex-
presses a desire for advancement through self-development efforts.

Communication

Oral Communi- Expresses thoughts verbally and nonverbally in a clear, concise, and straight-
cation forward manner that is appropriate for the target audience whether in a
group or individual situation.
Written Commu- Expresses ideas clearly and succinctly in writing, using appropriate grammati-
nication cal form for both formal and informal documents; Adjusts writing style,
tone, and language as indicated by the needs of the audience.
Listening Actively attends to and conveys understanding of the comments and ques-
tions of others in both group and individual situations; Hears, pays atten-
tion to, and determines important information and ideas presented
through spoken words and sentences; Performs active listening by asking
questions when appropriate.
Persuasiveness Uses written or oral communication to obtain agreement or acceptance of
an idea, plan, activity or product; Demonstrates keen insight of others’ be-
havior and tailors own behavior to persuade or influence them; Gains sup-
port and commitment from others.

Relational

Relationship/ Initiates and maintains effective relationships by presenting oneself to others

Interpersonal in a positive manner, even in the face of conflict; Responds to the needs,
Skills feelings, and opinions of others; uses relationships appropriately to accom-
plish personal or organizational goals.
Leadership Guides, directs, and motivates subordinates toward important and challeng-
ing work in line with their interests and abilities as well as the needs of
the organization; Gives regular, specific, and constructive feedback to sub-
ordinates in relation to their personal goals; Commands attention and re-
spect; Promotes positive change by setting goals and priorities that are in
line with the common vision of the organization.
Teamwork Works effectively with others by cooperating and contributing to the pursuit
of team goals; Communicates decisions, changes, and other relevant infor-
mation to the team in a timely manner; Develops supportive relationships
with colleagues and creates a sense of team spirit.
Conflict Man- Recognizes and openly addresses conflict appropriately; Arrives at construc-
agement/ tive solutions while maintaining positive working relationships.
Resolution

80
BEHAVIORAL DIMENSIONS 81

THE IMPORTANCE OF JOB ANALYSIS

The first step in designing any assessment center program is determining

the dimensions to be assessed and/or developed. This step is typically done
by conducting some sort of job analysis. Job analysis for assessment center
development is somewhat broader than traditional job analysis methods,
which simply seek to determine job tasks and KSAOs. Thornton and
Mueller-Hanson (2004) referred to this broader process as situational anal-
ysis, because it involves analyzing several components of the job situation,
such as the dimensions required, the relative competency required for each
dimension, the job tasks, and organizational environment. We advocate
this broader analysis at the beginning of the development of an assessment
center because it provides such a rich variety of information for many as-
pects of the development, implementation, validation, and defensibility of
an assessment program.
There are five major reasons job or situational analysis is a crucial first step
in developing assessment centers. First, the results of the job analysis produce
information that is useful for many aspects of building assessment centers.
Analyzing the job situation allows us to determine the dimensions to be as-
sessed. Identifying the relative proficiency level expected in the organization
gives us an indication of the difficulty level to build into the simulation exer-
cises. Knowing the job tasks gives us information about the content and types
of the simulation exercises to be used. Finally, a thorough understanding of
the organizational environment allows us to determine the setting of the as-
sessment center and the general orientation of the exercises.
A second reason for conducting a job analysis is to ensure good measure-
ment, that is, to achieve accurate personnel decisions. In order to hire, pro-
mote, and train the best people for a job, an organization has to know what
a job entails. Through job analysis, job-relevant dimensions can be selected
and used to identify the employees with the highest potential.
Third, job analysis provides us with crucial information used to train as-
sessors. That is, job analysis provides detailed information about the nature
of the dimensions, the necessary level of proficiency on each dimension,
and the behaviors that are commonly displayed relevant to each dimension.
In assessor training, assessors must come to a common understanding of
the meaning of the dimensions. In order to accurately rate the perform-
ance of participants, the assessor team must develop a common frame of
reference. We talk more specifically about frame of reference training in
chapter 7.
A fourth reason for conducting a sound job analysis is legal defensibility.
That is, any legal challenge to the use of an assessment center for selection
or promotion must be answered with evidence of thorough job analysis
(Thompson & Thompson, 1982). There are laws in many countries that
82 CHAPTER 5

prohibit personnel decisions based on race, color, sex, religion, national

origin, age, or disability, unless the characteristic has been explicitly shown
to be required for the job. In the United States, these laws include Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Age Discrimination in Employment
Act of 1967 (Landy, 2005). Much of what is done in human resource man-
agement involves a set of inferences. Assessment center developers infer
the behavioral dimensions from current job information or organizational
objectives; they infer what simulation exercises will elicit behavior-relevant
behaviors; they train assessors to infer performance effectiveness based on
observed behavior. Each one of these inferences can be challenged legally,
and the role of job analysis is to provide an organization with enough evi-
dence to be confident about the inferences themselves as well as the legal
appropriateness of the entire human resource process (Gatewood & Feild,
2001).
A final reason for conducting a job analysis is to develop exercises that
are face valid in the eye of the users and participants. For obvious psycho-
metric and legal reasons the exercises should, in fact, simulate relevant
work contexts. In addition, the exercises should have perceived relevance
because the content of an assessment center can impact applicants’ attrac-
tion to the organization, employees’ perceptions of fairness, and trainees’
motivation to learn, develop, and pursue follow-up training. Assessment
center participants expect organizations to evaluate them based on their
job-relevant skills and experiences, rather than other characteristics, such
as popularity or demographic characteristics. Perceived relevance of the as-
sessment or development program begins with complete and accurate in-
formation about job and organizational requirements derived from job
analysis.
All of these reasons take on heightened importance in light of the in-
creasing diversity of the workforce. Thorough job analysis, competency
modeling, and situational analysis ensure that the selection and develop-
mental interventions such as assessment centers are based on actual job re-
quirements and not stereotypical assumptions. Thus, these preliminary
analyses help organizations develop practices that are both in fact fair and
perceived to be fair by diverse individuals and groups.

BASIC ELEMENTS OF A JOB ANALYSIS

A wide variety of different techniques are available for conducting a job

analysis (see Brannick & Levine, 2002; Chen, Carsten, & Krauss, 2003;
Sanchez & Levine, 2001). Some methods focus on the job activities them-
selves, whereas others focus more on the characteristics of the people who
BEHAVIORAL DIMENSIONS 83

FIG. 5.1. The building blocks of job analysis.

carry out job activities. Some methods start at a very basic level of task infor-
mation and move up to organizational effectiveness; others start with very
broad organizational values and work downward to expected employee be-
haviors. Despite the variety of job analysis methods available to assessment
center developers, there are some basic elements common to many meth-
ods. These elements are illustrated in Fig. 5.1.

Document Review

During the document review stage, the assessment center developer gath-
ers information about the job being analyzed to develop a preliminary list
of the tasks and KSAOs required for the job. Table 5.3 lists many sources of
job information. One source is written material about the job and industry.
This material could come in the form of organizational charts, existing job
descriptions, policy/procedure manuals, training manuals, textbooks from
the discipline, technical manuals, and design specifications for the equip-
ment used on the job. Another excellent source of information about some
jobs is the Occupational Information Network, or O*NET (Peterson et al.,
84 CHAPTER 5

TABLE 5.3
Sources of Job Information

Observational Methods
Direct observation
Video recording
Audio recording
Actually do the job for a period of time
Relevant Documents—Internal to the Organization
Job descriptions
Organizational charts
Policy & procedure manuals
Training manuals
Equipment specifications
Relevant Documents—External to the Organization
O*NET
Occupational Outlook Handbook
Trade journals
Textbooks
Research literature
Other Activities for Obtaining Information
Attend industry conferences or conventions
Talk with other job analysts
Interview SMEs
Interview job incumbents
Have job incumbents complete work diaries
Interview trainers, instructors, and educators

2001). The O*NET is an online database (www.onetcenter.org) made avail-

able by the U.S. Department of Labor to provide information about indus-
try, work, and worker characteristics of many jobs in the U.S. economy.
There are numerous ways that assessment center developers can obtain
preliminary information about the job. For instance, he or she can conduct
observations of people carrying out the job. This process could be in person
or via an audio or video recording. In some instances, an assessment center
developer might even do the job for a period of time to get a real sense of
what “a day in life” is like for people in the position. If doing or observing
the work is unrealistic, the assessment center developer might interview job
incumbents individually or in groups. Employees can complete work dia-
ries over a period of time. In addition, assessment center developers might
attend the technical/professional conferences people in the job often at-
tend or read the profession’s trade journals. The key idea is to use a variety
of sources of information about any job being studied. Each source of infor-
mation may provide a different picture of the job. This does not mean that
a given source is not valid; in fact, all provide accurate information from dif-
ferent perspectives.
BEHAVIORAL DIMENSIONS 85

Use of Subject Matter Experts

Many job analysis methods rely on subject matter experts, or SMEs. SMEs
are individuals with experience or insight into the job of interest. SMEs as-
sist the assessment center developer in understanding the tasks and KSAOs
required for a particular job. SMEs can be job incumbents, supervisors,
training specialists, or anyone who knows the job. The assessment center
developer might hold a workshop with a diverse panel of SMEs to verify the
accuracy of the initial list of tasks and expand them into more formalized
task statements. The assessment center developer then works with the SMEs
to determine the relative importance of the job tasks, and what specific
KSAOs are required to complete each task.

Data Collection

After the job analyst has a refined set of information, data are often col-
lected using a much larger sample of job incumbents. The most common
method for collecting additional information is a survey instrument. The
survey may be created using the tasks and KSAOs generated from the SME
panel in the specific organization, or may be purchased “off the shelf” from
a consulting firm. Regardless of the method used, it is important that cer-
tain information be obtained about the tasks, the KSAOs, and how the tasks
and KSAOs are related to one another.
Although not all the job analysis methods collect all the information re-
viewed here, research (Goldstein, Schneider, & Zedeck, 1993), case law
(see Thompson & Thompson, 1982), and the Uniform Guidelines (Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Rights Commission, Depart-
ment of Labor, & Department of Justice, 1978) all suggest that diverse in-
formation should be obtained, because it provides the basis for developing
and defending many aspects of an assessment center.

Data Analysis and Policymaking

The next step of the job analysis process involves synthesizing all of the in-
formation collected to determine (a) the dimensions to be assessed, (b) the
types of exercises that will be developed to measure the dimensions, (c) the
level of difficulty required and the degree of proficiency required for each
dimension in each exercise, and (d) the general context or setting in which
the assessment center will be set. At this point, the assessment center devel-
oper may construct a dimension by exercise matrix, which specifies which
dimensions will be assessed in which exercises. This matrix may be revisited
as the assessment center is developed.
86 CHAPTER 5

Documentation and Maintenance

A final step to any job analysis is documentation. It is essential for all infor-
mation obtained during all steps of the job analysis process to be well docu-
mented and carefully filed. In addition, the job analyst should document
the process by which the job analysis was conducted, how the data were ana-
lyzed, and how the final dimensions and exercise content were selected.
Moreover, it is important to re-evaluate the job analysis results regularly.
This is especially true when the job has recently undergone a change, the
job has been redesigned, the organization’s mission or values have shifted,
or the job’s boundaries may have shifted. It may be necessary to hold addi-
tional SME panels or collect additional job incumbent data to ensure that
the original tasks and KSAOs are still essential.

Summary

The foregoing procedures provide a systematic means for analyzing a job as

it is currently being carried out by its incumbents. These procedures are ef-
fective in capturing existing behaviors, activities, important dimensions,
and types of problems encountered. If the job remains stable, the analysis
of existing behaviors may be adequate for the development assessment pro-
cedures to select and develop new employees for that job. In fact, many jobs
do remain stable over a period of time, and the basic attributes required for
success also remain stable in the short term.
Despite these facts, all too often the pressures to start an assessment cen-
ter make it difficult to adequately carry out these basic yet necessary steps. It
is important to note that job analysis provides valuable information that will
be used at several stages of assessment center development: the dimensions
to be assessed, examples of behaviors that clarify the dimensions, sugges-
tions for the types of simulation exercises, suggestions for the content of
problems to be put into the exercises, an indication of the level of profi-
ciency required on the dimensions, standards for scoring assessee perform-
ance in the exercises, and documentation of job-relatedness of the assess-
ment process. The effort required for a thorough job analysis, therefore,
yields many payoffs.

SOURCES OF JOB ANALYSIS METHODS

There are more job analysis methods than we are able to cover in this chap-
ter. These methods include the Task Analysis Inventory, the Position Analy-
sis Questionnaire (McCormick, Jeanneret, & Mecham, 1989), the Critical
Incidents Technique (Flanagan, 1954), Fleishman’s Job Analysis Survey
BEHAVIORAL DIMENSIONS 87

(Fleishman & Reilly, 1992), Functional Job Analysis (Fine & Cronshaw,
1999), the Job Elements Method (Primoff, 1975), the Job Components In-
ventory (Banks, 1988), and Tasks and Demands Analysis (Rohmert, 1988).
We refer readers to the most recent papers and texts on this topic for a
complete overview (see Brannick & Levine, 2002; Chen et al., 2003; Gate-
wood & Feild, 2001; Sanchez & Levine, 2001). Table 5.4 compares these
many methods.
Although many different job analysis methods can contribute valuable
information, usually no single method will suffice. Surveys by Spychalski et
al. (1997) and Krause and Gebert (2003) showed that the vast majority of
assessment center developers used several job analysis techniques. Regard-
less of the method employed, for the purpose of developing assessment
centers, special attention should be given to identifying and validating the
behavioral dimensions to be assessed, defining the dimensions in behav-
ioral terms, and collecting a large amount of rich information in order to
inform the development of the simulation exercises as well as the general
assessment center context.

NONTRADITIONAL METHODS OF JOB ANALYSIS

The job analysis methods just described are helpful in understanding cer-
tain aspects of work: activities currently being done in specific jobs; KSAOs
that are currently important; the stable aspects of jobs that change little
over time. Traditional methods reflect a bottom-up approach, in the sense
that they carefully examine the specific, existing elements of work and
make inductions about important dimensions of work. However, these
techniques may not be completely adequate, because many jobs today are
not simple and stable. Many jobs are characterized by vagueness, complex-
ity, and change. In addition, boundaries between jobs are becoming more
and more “fuzzy” as organizational structures become more team-based.
Some have argued that because of this, traditional methods for conducting
job analysis may not always be appropriate (Howard, 1995). In this section,
we explore two nontraditional approaches to understanding work behav-
ior: competency modeling and strategic job analysis. These techniques may
be viewed as top-down approaches, because they start at the level of current
and future organizational objectives.

Competency Modeling

An alternative to traditional job analysis is a top-down, deductive approach

known as competency modeling (Schippmann, 1999). In this approach,
rather than starting with the job as a point of analysis, the organization is
88

TABLE 5.4
Comparison of Job Analysis Methods

Position Fleishman Job Job Task & Strategic

Analysis Critical- Job Analysis Functional Element Component Demands Competency Job
Task Questionnaire Incidents Technique Job Analysis Method Inventory Analysis Modeling Analysis
Evaluation Factor Analysis (PAQ ) Technique (F-JAS) (FJA) ( JEM) ( JCI) (T&DA) (CM) (SJA)

Off-the-Shelf Avail- No Yes No In-Part In-Part In-Part Yes Yes No No

ability?
Standardization? Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No
User/Respondent Moderate/ Low/Moder- Moderate Moderate/ High Moderate
Availability? High ate High
Required Amount Low Moderate Low/Mod- Low High Moderate/
of Analyst erate High
Training?
# of People Re- Large Small Small Small/ Moderate Small
quired? Moder-
ate
Cost? Moderate/ Low/Moder- Moderate/ Low/Mod- Moderate/ Low/Mod-
High ate High erate High erate
Focus on Organiza- No No No No No No No Somewhat Yes Yes
tion Goals/Mis-
sion/Values?
Considers the fu- No No No No No No No No No Yes
ture of the job?

Source. Modified and expanded from Gatewood and Feild (2001).

BEHAVIORAL DIMENSIONS 89

first considered. That is, the analyst first identifies what the organization
needs to be effective. Then KSAOs are identified that allow an employee to
be effective in a number of jobs within the organization (Lawler, 1994).
Such an approach has become popular in organizations, especially with the
current trend for organizations to identify their core competencies, or the
characteristics that the organization (as opposed to the employee) needs to
be successful (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990).
Despite the concept’s popularity in the business world, a precise method
for conducting competency modeling has yet to be well defined (Schipp-
mann et al., 2000). Table 5.5 lists some of the major differences between
traditional job analysis and competency modeling. Competencies are often

TABLE 5.5
Job Analysis Versus Competency Modeling

Characteristic Job Analysis Competency Modeling

Purpose:
Focus:
Rigor of methods & meas-
urement:
Variance of source/type of
information depending
on purpose:
Reliability of ratings and
judgments evaluated:
Effort to understand the
broader business context;
strategy; alignment of
business goals:
Level of analysis/focus:
Level of detail:
Orientation toward time:
Face validity:
Focus on personality and
values:
Used more as a basis for se-
lection and performance
appraisal programs
Work-focused
Rigorous
Combination of methods
often used; specific com-
bination heavily depend-
ent on purpose of job
analysis
Almost always done
Seldom considered
Focus is on specific jobs
and the characteristics
that differentiate them
from one another; focus
is on differences
Highly detailed
Oriented toward shorter-
term job descriptions
Little consideration given to
the “flavor” of the organi-
zation
Not so much
Used more as a basis for
training and development
programs
Worker-focused
Not so rigorous
Same method typically used
regardless of purpose
Seldom done
Substantial effort taken
Focus is on individual-level
competencies that cross
occupational categories
or jobs or the entire or-
ganization; focus is on
similarities
More broad
Oriented toward long-term
organizational fit
Methods produce results that
capture the language and
spirit of the organization
Yes

Note. Based on results presented in Schippmann et al. (2000).