Work Samples and Simulations
Work Samples and Simulations
Work sample tests require applicants to perform tasks or work activities that mirror
the tasks employees perform on the job. For instance, applicants for an
Administrative Assistant position may be asked to transcribe an internal memo
using a word processor or to accurately file a stack of paperwork. Because
work samples require applicants to perform tasks identical or highly similar to
tasks from the job, great care is taken in trying to mimic the work environment
to the greatest extent possible. For example, applicants to the Administrative
Assistant position may perform tasks at a workstation highly similar, if not
identical, to that found on the job. As with job
knowledge tests, work sample tests should only be used in situations
where applicants are expected to possess the required competencies upon entry
into the position. If training on how to perform the work activities will be
provided after selection, the work sample method may not be appropriate.
In addition to work samples, which attempt to re-create
specific work scenarios, performance tests can also be designed to mirror very
broad aspects of the job that may draw on fundamental competencies needed to
perform a wide range of job tasks. For example, the Administrative Assistant
position mentioned above may require individuals to routinely find specific
materials to answer various questions posed by upset or hostile customers.
Rather than re-create a large number of scenarios to cover a wide array of
situations, employers may design a single exercise to measure the general
competencies in question (e.g., an interactive role-play between the applicant
and a well-trained actor that measures applicant's problem solving,
communication, and interpersonal skills). Applicant scores on work sample
tests are generated by trained assessors who observe the applicant's behavior
and/or by measuring task outcomes (e.g., the degree of interpersonal skills
demonstrated or the number of errors made in transcribing an internal memo).
Considerations:
- Validity —
Tasks applicants are asked to perform are very representative of the
tasks performed on the job (i.e., they have a high degree of content validity) and performance on the tests
relates highly to performance on the job (i.e., a high degree of criterion-related validity)
- Face
Validity/Applicant Reactions — Applicants often perceive work
samples as being very fair (i.e., a high degree of face validity)
- Administration Method — Often
individual administration only (i.e., may not be suitable for group
administrations); "Hands-on" performance by the applicant in a simulated
work environment
- Subgroup Differences —
Generally little or no performance differences are found between men and
women or applicants of different races, although the presence of gender
and/or racial differences depends on the competencies being assessed
- Development Costs — May be
costly to develop, both in terms of time and money; May require periodic
updating (e.g., if the task was using a typewriter to draft a document and
the organization becomes fully automated such that documents are now
drafted using word processors)
- Administration Costs — May be
time consuming and expensive to administer; Requires individuals to
observe, and sometimes rate, applicant performance
- Utility/ROI — High return on
investment if you need applicants who possess specific, critical
competencies upon entry into the job; If the competencies measured by the
tests can be learned on the job or are not highly critical then the return
on investment will be significantly lower
- Common Uses — Best used for
positions for which the measured competencies are highly critical for
successful performance on the job, there is a limited number of applicants
to test, and only a small number of prospective applicants are expected to
have the needed competencies
References:
(See Section VI for a summary of each article)
Campion, J. E.
(1972). Work sampling for personnel selection. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 56(1), 40-44.
Gilliland, S. W.
(1995). Fairness from the applicants' perspective: Reactions to employee
selection procedures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 3(1),
11-19.
Lance, C. E.,
Johnson, C. D., Douthitt, S. S., Bennett, W., & Harville, D. L. (2000).
Good news: Work sample administrators' global performance judgments are (about)
as valid as we've suspected. Human Performance, 13(3), 253-277.
Robertson, I. T. & Kandola, R. S. (1982). Work sample tests: Validity, adverse impact and applicant
reaction. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55(3), 171-183.
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.
The following Society for Industrial and Organizational
Psychology (SIOP) website contains information on Work Samples and
Simulations:
http://www.siop.org/workplace/employment%20testing/employment_testing_toc.aspx