Going Global

The A&DC Thought Leadership Series

Going Global
International Considerations for Assessing Talent

Going Global
International Considerations for Assessing Talent

Introduction

Organizations are having to consider how they can become truly global entities, as gone are the days
when they could afford to operate as a series of independent multi-national locations. This change has
inevitably led to an increasing desire to assess talent on a global scale. Fuelled by this global
marketplace and the willingness of individuals to relocate, it is becoming increasingly complex to fairly
and accurately select for roles.

Organizations frequently ask us:

• How do I fairly and accurately assess Talent to work in my country or in another country?
• How do I fairly and accurately assess Talent for Global positions, eg those individuals who have
to work across various markets?

Increasingly organizations are finding that they can achieve their global talent goals of fairly and
accurately assessing by using Assessment Center methodology. This paper will discuss some of the
reasons why Assessment Center (AC) methodology is so powerful for global assessment, and some of
the cultural considerations for the design and implementation of successful global ACs.

Why use Assessment Center Methodology for Global Selection and Development

1. Communicating organizational strategies. ACs can be a useful way of communicating an
organization’s strategies internally and externally, eg business simulations recreate the
strategies of the hiring organization.

2. Creating /Promoting organizational culture or culture change. Business simulations can include
the values of the organization and the Assessor marking guide can incorporate what acceptable
behavior looks like in that particular organization, eg if a company wants people to take more
calculated risks this can be designed and assessed in the simulation.

3. PR and promoting the employer brand in the marketplace. If Candidates have a bad experience
during the recruitment process they tell a lot of people, some of whom could be your potential
customers. So you should make sure your process represents your business positively as even
unsuccessful Candidates can be advocates of your brand.

© 2010 The A&DC Group V1 03/10 Page 1 of 7

4. Predictive validity – Arthur et al in 2003, looked at the validity of AC Dimensions and found a
mean estimated correlation across six major Dimensions of behavior of 0.36, with correlations
for individual Dimensions between 0.39 and 0.25. They looked at a regression-based
composite of AC Dimensions (different to an overall AC rating) and found a multiple correlation
of 0.45 with performance.
5. Robust/Legally defensible when designed properly. Terpstra et al. (1999) found that ACs were
infrequently challenged, especially in comparison to their usage. Hough and Oswold (2000)
found ACs to have low adverse impact. This is a critical factor for countries like the US and UK
that are becoming increasingly litigious.
6. Realistic job preview (face validity). ACs offer Candidates an insight into the job role so they
can self select in or out of the process. Most organizations have long since recognized that
selection is a two way process and as we come out of recession this increases in importance if
your organization wants to secure the ‘Top Talent’.
7. Perceived fairness. Research has found that Candidates perceive ACs to be fairer than
personality tests during selection. Candidate perceptions of a fair process are found to affect
commitment and various citizenship behaviors. This also means they are less likely to appeal
the selection process or decision.
8. Engagement and the impact of the psychological contract. Employees who have a strong
psychological contract with their organization are more likely to go the extra mile and be loyal.
An AC is the perfect opportunity for Candidates to demonstrate interpersonal sensitivity,
informativeness and two way communication, all of which predict formation of a relational
psychological contract.
9. Recognized global approach and growing in popularity. Numerous studies show that AC
methodology is growing internationally. There are 50,000 ACs operational worldwide. Fifty four
of the Fortune 500 organizations were sampled by Eurich, Krause, Cigularov and Thornton in
2009 and of these, 93% were using ACs.
10. Behavioral and human approach. ACs provide the opportunity to see what people actually do
and say in work-related situations rather than relying on self-reported behavior as in traditional
interviews. This also means the chances of cheating are significantly reduced.
11. Flexible and integrate well with other tools. An AC must include business simulations but it can
also include a structured interview and psychometric tests, therefore making it a versatile
methodology. Combining multiple methodologies further increases predictive validity.
12. Modern, innovative and adaptable. For example, Centers can be run by a computer based
program such as an Inbox, where each person has their own ‘office’ and computer to work on;
day in the life suites; telephone roleplay; video conferencing; multiple roleplays, etc.
13. Providing information on strengths and development areas for future personal development. AC
methodology enables organizations to capture rich data about an individual’s behavior. This
evidence can then be used in a feedback session with individuals to help them develop.
Organizations also use this methodology to identify trends, for example, team/organization
strengths and development areas.
14. Fewer security issues than with online testing. As ACs are generally face-to-face, there is a
reduced risk of personal information being intercepted or identity impersonation or theft.
Perhaps most importantly ROI figures for ACs have been reported as high as 300% in the private
sector (Joiner, 2004). At a time when HR is having to prove its worth more than ever, these arguments
are compelling.


Key Considerations When Designing and Implementing an International AC

Defining Success

Firstly your organizational strategy and people strategy need to be aligned – What are your objectives?
This is important as it will help you establish internal and external commitment and influence the design
of your assessment process and the clarity of communication going forward. If you are designing an
AC to identify talent in another country you will need to take local advice. Different countries have
different local laws and policies such as data protection laws and protected groups. For example,
sexual orientation is not protected as a sub-group in Latvia but it is in Luxemburg.

Once you have defined what success of the assessment project will look like, you also need to define
what success in the target role looks like. This scoping or job analysis phase is critical to the success
of the Center and its legal defensibility. Speaking to people working in the target role and their line
managers enables you to identify what Competencies/Dimensions (knowledge, skills and attitudes) are
required to be successful in the role and the most frequently occurring situations in which job
incumbents find themselves, eg working in groups, one-to-one or alone. This is the data you use to
design your AC and the way the Competencies/Dimensions will be assessed. This makes certain that
the process is distinguishing between the individuals based on the Competencies/Dimensions required
to be successful within the job role, rather than individual subjective perspectives, which will be
informed by their own culture and background.

If the role does not involve significant numerical reasoning and you include a numerical reasoning test
only to screen out large numbers of Candidates, you run the risk of losing talented individuals and
leaving yourself open to claims of adverse impact.

For example, if you are trying to identify global talents who can function across different markets and
this requires them to speak business-level English with colleagues and customers, you could use an
English language test to screen applicants before they attend the AC. Another requirement for this type
of global talent may be ‘Openness to Change’ or ‘Flexibility’, if they are required to adapt to various
cultures. It is important that the Competencies/Dimensions and related behavioral indicators are
reviewed by diverse subject matter experts rather than defined by a homogenous group within the
organization, which runs the risk of being driven by one set of cultural values.

For example effective management styles differ across countries (Trompanaars 1993). A Competency
like ‘Effective Communication’ can be defined very differently in terms of eye contact, hand
movements/gestures across cultures. Therefore if you are assessing Talents to work in a particular
country and culture, you need to ensure you have recreated that culture in your AC design so that you
do not negatively assess someone for demonstrating their own cultural way of achieving the goal.

The Eurich, Krause, Cigularov and Thornton 2009 study found the most popular competencies to
measure in the US are Communication, Problem Solving, Planning and Organizing, Influencing Others,
Consideration of Others and Drive. Arthur et al 2003 also found the top three account for 20% of
variance in job performance. The same top three were also found to be the most popular
Competencies globally in A&DC’s global research questionnaire 2008. The names of these
Competencies may be recognized and translated all over the world; however their exact definitions will
inevitably vary from culture to culture.


The most popular global business simulations are Roleplays, Presentations, In-Baskets and Analysis
Exercises. Group Discussions are not as popular for global assessments, potentially due to differing
cultural reactions to this situation. For example, in collectivist cultures such as Japan, effectiveness
depends on getting the group to perform, whereas in individualistic cultures such as the US,
effectiveness depends upon personal excellence. An untrained Assessor may incorrectly perceive this
behavior from a Japanese Candidate as being overly collaborative and an American Candidate as not
being a team player! However using a Group Discussion in a global Development Center can provide
rich feedback for Candidates about how they could adapt their behavior depending on the other
cultures taking part in business meetings.

Interviews are of course the most popular form of assessment with Organizations and Candidates.
However, as these rely on self-report rather than the observation of actual behaviors, these are not
business simulations but are still valid components of ACs when structured and well designed.

Assembling the Team

There are many people involved in ACs and all need careful consideration. You need diverse
stakeholders championing the project and hopefully you have involved them from the beginning in order
to define success. Do your Project Managers, Designers, Reviewers, Center Manager, Assessors,
Administrators and Roleplayers have knowledge of the relevant cultures attending your AC? Ideally the
relevant cultures will be represented in the project team so they can share their experience. Your
international designers and reviewers can then ensure your exercises avoid jargon, metaphors and
colloquialisms. A&DC often sets its exercises in a fictional country so that no geographical knowledge
and assumptions are required. Research suggests there has been an increased use of HR
practitioners and Psychologists in the delivery of Centers, as numbers of middle managers in
organizations have been reduced.

Creating and Communicating the Plan

Communication is another critical area, as carefully setting the expectations of those involved,
particularly the Candidates, increases the chances of long term success. Do you have a clearly defined
policy statement that you can share with Candidates covering information such as the objectives of the
Center, the types of exercises, data storage principles and tips for preparation? Honesty is crucial; a
Development Center for developmental purposes is very different to an Assessment Center for job
losses or redeployment. Openness relates to comprehensive laws about employees rights to
personnel practices and increased perceptions of fairness and transparency increases accuracy. If you
are designing a Center where materials will need to be translated into various languages ensure you
have researched reputable companies and left enough time for translations to be reviewed.

Ensuring Assessment Effectiveness

This is an area that many organizations omit from the process and in some countries this does not have
legal implications, however in the US this is a highly valued part of assessment design. In order to
thoroughly review your Center, a Pilot Center should be run with a similar population to the target
population. This allows the materials to be reviewed by Candidates and Assessors, the tools to be
validated and adverse impact checks to be carried out. If you are using a psychometric test as part of
your Center, is it related to the target role and have you asked about validity, reliability and adverse
impact? A pilot Center is also the perfect time for newly trained Assessors to practice their new skills.


Training

All Assessors should be trained in the process of behavioral observation (ORCE) and the exercises
being used in the Center. Assessor Training is where the team agree their understanding of the
competencies and benchmarks, and Assessors learn about bias, stereotyping and cultural sensitivity. If
you are using Roleplays, you will need to run Roleplayer Training so that they are also effective in the
culture you are operating in and do not compromise the integrity of the process.

In certain religions, devout males will avoid eye contact with women who are not part of their family
which might be construed negatively as part of their communication and relationship building behaviors.
In this case, you would have to use Roleplayers of the same sex so that the Candidate feels
comfortable. It is also important when training and briefing your Roleplayers to be clear on the type of
phrases and language they can and can not use.

There may be a situation where you are training international Assessors, so ensure you allow 2 to 3
days for Assessor Training if Assessors are learning and working in a language that is not their mother
tongue.

Cultural considerations are also important when working with your Assessor team, for example some
cultures keep to time more than others, eg Germany is rule-oriented, whereas Thai culture is more
relaxed about the time. In some cultures it is acceptable to eat while you work but for example French
culture still values a proper meal break. Training international Assessors together helps them to learn
from each other and develops understanding, eg regarding Candidate output, there are differing
standards of what is acceptable in different countries, eg in China, Thailand and South East Asia, brief
responses in note form are more acceptable when replying to an email, than in Western Culture.

Running the Center

When designing and running your Center there are a number of timetable considerations that you
should consider. Have you ensured you are avoiding religious days to run your Center? Does your
timetable allow for flexibility for prayer time? If you have Candidates coming from all over the world are
you offering diverse foods? Candidates should have received clear communications before the day of
the Center, however due to potentially differing expectations it is important to provide a clear overview
of the day, what the exercises are and how they will be assessed. It's also more important than ever to
provide clear, detailed instructions for each exercise being administered to make clear the expectations
of the Candidate; as well as time to clarify concerns or queries. Before the Center, Candidates should
be asked if they need any reasonable accommodations made, eg a partially sighted individual may
request a larger print font be used.

Ensure there is time for Assessors to do their individual work and discuss cultural differences with the
assessing team. If you are managing the Center, be aware of the cultural dynamics within the
Assessor discussion, do all Assessors have the opportunity to express their perception of the
evidence? Feedback is an important component of a well run Center but you need to be aware that
individuals will react differently and cultures may have certain expectations, eg the US may be more
open to individualized feedback however in Japan this may be problematic. Research has found that in
the EU feedback is provided after an AC more often than in the US. Best practice advises that direct
supervisors should not see results in selection situations due to privacy issues, however for
Development Centers Line Manager involvement in the feedback process can be beneficial. If you
have assessed Candidates in a different country to where they currently work have you provided
support on their return? Their Line Manager or Local HR should help them translate the feedback into
local culture, context, their role and support development opportunities.


Evaluating Success in Order to Maintain and Enhance

Although the rest of the world does not currently require the same validation levels as the US, it makes
business sense to understand the success of a process you have spent time and money designing and
implementing. For example, anonymous Candidate and Assessor feedback can be collected to help
organizations with continuous improvement. Are you monitoring for equal opportunities?

These variables should be monitored and checked by HR using the four-fifths rule or other statistical
analysis for signs of adverse impact.

We all know that things are moving at a faster and faster pace; organizations and job roles change
quickly so your Center should be reviewed regularly to ensure it remains effective at assessing Talent.

Conclusion

Assessment Center methodology is a versatile and powerful tool for assessment or development but
needs to be used with care and consideration to ensure assessments are directly relevant to the target
job role and culture. Working with colleagues who are from the culture you are assessing in will help
you ensure the effectiveness of your Centers. The challenge for organizations is to achieve their global
strategies by harmonizing differences between cultures while preserving their individual strengths.
Regardless of where in the world you are designing and running your Centers there are some best
practice guidelines you should be aware of to ensure the smooth running of your Centers.

Aspect Best Practice says…

The ratio of Assessors to Participants should be at least 1:2, ideally 1:1

An Assessor should ideally assess each Participant only once.
All Assessors should be trained in the Behavioral Assessment Process, eg
Assessors ORCE.
Assessors should be at least one level more senior than the target role.
At least double the number of required Assessors should be trained to ensure
coverage and flexibility.
Generally between 4 and 12 Participants should attend an Assessment Center.
Participants
Participants should be briefed on what will be expected of them prior to the event,
and again at the actual event.
Between 6 – 8 competencies should be assessed at a Center.
Competencies
A competency should be measured at least twice, ideally 3 times at a Center.
A minimal number of exercises should be used at a Center, but no less than 2
Exercises and preferably 3 or more.
Each exercise should assess between 4 – 6 competencies.
Each Center should have a Center Manager to quality check and coordinate the
event.
Center Manager
Each Wash-up session should be chaired by a Center Manager.
All Roleplayers should be trained and familiar with the exercise(s) they will be
Roleplayers
using.

References

Arthur, W. A., Jr., Day, E. A., McNelly, T. L., & Edens, P. S. (2003). A meta-analysis of the criterion-
related validity of Assessment Center Dimensions. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125–149.

Ballantyne, I.& Povah, N. (2004). Assessment and Development Centers. Aldershot: Gower.

Cascio, W. F., Jacobs, R. and Silva, J. 2010. Validity, Utility, and Adverse Impact: Practical Applications
From 30 Years of Data. In Adverse Impact: Implications for Organizational Staffing and High Stakes
Selection, ed. J.L. Outtz, 271–288. NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Dunleavy, E., and Gutman, A. 2009. Fasten your seatbelts: Supreme Court to hear Ricci v. Destefano.
The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 46, 4, 31-43.

Eurich T.L. et al (2009). Assessment Centers: Current Practices in the United States. J Bus Psychol,
24, 387-407.

Gutman, A., and Dunleavy, E. 2009. The Supreme Court Ruling in Ricci v. Destefano. The Industrial-
Organizational Psychologist, 47, 2, 57-71.

Hough, L. M and Oswald, F.L. (2000). Personnel selection: Looking toward the future-remembering the
past. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 631-664.

International Task Force on AC Guidelines 2008. Guidelines and Ethical Considerations for
Assessment Centre Operations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 17, 3, 243-253.
www.assessmentcenters.org/articles.asp

Joiner, D. A. (2004). Assessment center trends: Assessment center issues and resulting trends. Paper
presented at the 28th annual meeting of IPMAAC, Seattle, Washington

Krause, D. E., and Thornton 111, G. C. 2008. International Perspectives on Current Assessment
Centre Practices and Future Challenges. In Assessment Centers: Unlocking Potential for Growth, ed.
S. Schlebusch and G. Roodt, 285–300. South Africa: Knowres Publishing (Pty) Ltd.

Povah, N. & Povah, L. (2009). Succeeding at Assessment Centers For Dummies. Chichester: Wiley.

Price, R. and Patterson, F. 2003. On-line Application Forms: Psychological Impact on Applicants and
Implications for Recruiters. Selection and Development Review, 19, 2, April.

Terpstra, D. E., Mohamed, A. A., and Kethley, R. B. 1999. An Analysis of Federal Court Cases
Involving Nine Selection Devices. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 7, 1, 26-34.

Trompenaars, A. (1993). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global business. New
York: Irwin.


About Assessment and Development Consultants Inc (A&DC)

We are a leading international HR consultancy that specializes in delivering excellence
through employee selection, development and engagement. We provide intelligent talent
management solutions that help organizations to align their people strategy with business
strategy.

Discover the right people
Assessing and selecting talent for all levels of your business

Transform business behaviors
Identifying and developing current and future Managers and Leaders

Energize for peak performance
Improving performance through enhancing motivation and engagement

Based in the US and UK, we also operate globally through our Consulting team and
professional partners, enabling us to deliver A&DC talent management solutions to clients
throughout the world.

For more of our resources and downloads visit http://www.adc.us.com

Assessment & Development Consultants Inc (A&DC)
Telephone 866-651-1791 Email: info@adc.us.com Web: www.adc.us.com

© 2010 a trademark of The V1 Group
A&DC is The A&DC Group A&DC03/10 Limited Page 8 of 7
All rights reserved

Going Global

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Going Global

Similar to Going Global (20)

Going Global