It’s perhaps quite natural to believe that the Chinese personality is so different to others that it requires a special psychometric test to assess it. What better way to sell your new Chinese personality test than to state that it is “high time a test for the Chinese” were developed. However, this throws doubt upon the utility of rigorously developed international psychometric tests of personality.

Given the above, we embarked on a research program to assess whether Chinese people differ significantly comparied to others in terms of personality structure and whether personality tests that purport to assess Chinese Personality are able to predict any more work performance than internationally developed tests have already been proven to do!

You can read our research findings it: personality.cn, our Chinese Personality at Work Research Site.

No time to read the whole site? Here’s a quick summary:

Locally developed psychometric tests which purport to assess “indigenous” aspects of Chinese Personality were found to be less reliable than reputable internationally developed tests of personality. Furthermore, there is a big question as to whether so-called “indigenous” traits are Chinese-specific. Issues such as traditionalism or face also exist in other cultures! Moreover, the research has demonstrated that whatever we choose to believe about Chinese Personality, locally developed (Hong Kong) tests of “indigenous” personality add nothing to the prediction of performance at work that is not already accounted for by reputable internationally developed personality tests.

We present this research in a free HRM webinar which you can watch here. We held a vote at the beginning and end of our webinar whereby we asked attendees if they believed that Chinese Personality is so different that Chinese people need their own personality test. At the beginning of the webinar, the majority of the attendees said yes! By the end of the webinar only one attendee still believed this to be the case! We recommend choosing well designed psychometric tests with high reliability and validity. Personality is a universal construct, thus locally developed tests may have little benefit to the hiring manager!

PsyAsia’s range of early-bird and group booking discounts for our October Psychometric Training Courses in Singapore will expire in just 7 days!  If you intend coming on our October training for BPS Level A, BPS Level B (including Identity and Apollo Personality Questionnaire accreditation), Saville Consulting Wave or BPS Test Administration, please do ensure that you register by 30 July. All discounts will expire in our systems and cannot be reinstated!  Please view all course dates at http://dates.psyasia.com.

Remember, PsyAsia International is Asia’s Independent Leader in Psychometric Tests and Training. We only sell the world’s best psychometric tests, our courses are run by resident  fully registered psychologists and we offer blended e-learning with our face-to-face training for all BPS certification courses.

If you have any queries about our psychometric courses, do please get in touch – an easy way to get an instant response is to use the LIVE CHAT facility on our website. Alternatively, please email us.

Finally, don’t forget that we’ve arranged a session for anyone interested in Singapore Level A and B training to meet with the facilitator online. He will show you course slides and workbooks and answer any questions you may have. This session runs on Tuesday 27th July at 5pm Singapore/Hong Kong time. Click here to register.

Online Psychometric Testing Mini-Course: Session 3

In this session we will explore the following:

1. Why psychometric tests are used and how they are useful. We will do this by referring mainly to alternative methods of assessment.

The short answer to the first part of the above question is that psychometric tests are used because (assuming they are well designed tests) they are a reliable and valid means of assessing people. We will discuss in a future session exactly what is mean by reliability and validity when applied to psychometrics.

Let’s consider a few alternatives to psychometric tests and highlight this issue further. 

Unstructured Interviews

Most candidates who apply for a job will expect to have an interview at some stage of the process and indeed, most organisations will work an interview into the process. However, how useful is this interview for predicting performance on the job?  This depends a lot on the training of those who will be interviewing. Many people who conduct interviews have never been trained. Perhaps one day a boss asked them to go and interview a candidate for a job and it continued from there. They may have years of experience but experience and competence are not the same. Most people who interview use what is known as the traditional interview. It is also sometimes called an unstructured interview. The idea is that this is a time to meet with and get to know the job applicant. Often the interviewer is thinking things such as:

“Let’s see if he has a firm handshake.”

“Let’s see if he looks me in the eye.”

“I’ll ask him what he does in his spare time.”

The problem is that none of the answers to these questions will predict performance at work. So what if I have a limp handshake? Donald Trump (very successful property tycoon) does not even like to shake hands – he’s worried about germs! Imagine him at a job interview.  The shake would be very limp if at all.  In some cultures it’s rude to look people in the eye – so we cannot go assuming that those who avoid eye contact will not be good performers or that they are dishonest or hiding something. As for spare time, what about somebody who puts together model cars or aeroplanes on the weekend, does it mean that will be a good designer or engineer. No, this may simply be a low level weekend interest and not something that would keep them entertained as a career. Not to mention the fact that in some parts of the world it’s actually illegal to ask about people’s hobbies in a job selection process!

The point to grasp then is that often the people conducting interviews have little or no training and are running unstructured interviews that have little relevance to job performance and therefore lack both reliability and validity.  However, the suggestion is not that we remove interviews totally!

Structured Interviews

Research has shown that interviews have good reliability and validity when run in a particular way by those who have undergone thorough training. These are called structured interviews. The idea here is to align the interview questions to the competencies required of the candidate to be successful in the job. Then the interviewer asks the same or very similar questions to each candidate based on job requirements. Behavioural interviews are one type of structured interview. The questions are designed to elicit a high level of evidence that the candidate has displayed the behaviour associated with competent performance over repeated occasions in the past. Another type of structured interview is Situational interviewing – here the candidate is asked what they would do in certain situations. Situational interviews are generally less valid than Behavioural interviews. The biggest problem with getting HR and Consultants to run structured interviews is the need for training. PsyAsia used to run a 2-day course in behavioural interviewing, but our clients in Asia told us that would require too much time out of the workplace. We thus reduced this to a one-day course (see our behaviour-based interviewing course here if interested) but whilst this satisfies the big decision makers it really only serves as an introduction to interviewing. There needs to be more communication and understanding between HR and those who hold the purse-strings in Asia if we are to increase competence in this area!

Psychometric Tests and Structured Interviews

So thus far, we pointed out that interviews can be reliable and valid but that can only happen if the interviewers have been appropriately trained and where using structured interviews; preferably a behavioural interview.  Those using psychometric tools also need to be appropriately trained in order to ensure they remain reliable and valid tools. Assuming training and competence requirements are met for both tests and interviews, why use tests? 

Psychometric tests are able to cover a lot more ground in far less time. Aptitude tests give us an indication of numerical, verbal and spatial skills in 18 minutes if using modern tests like the Saville Consulting Aptitude range.  There’s no way we could discover this information in even a one-hour interview!  Personality assessments can sample and assess personality traits relevant to performance on the job. The average completion time for good personality assessments is 30-40 minutes. There also a few good faster tools available which take around 20 minutes. The amount of information gleaned in this short period of time is a credit to the developers of psychometric tests. However, with particular regard to personality testing, it is necessary to confirm the profile with behavioural evidence from the candidate. So, whilst the profile may suggest somebody who really enjoys multi-tasking, this becomes a basis for an interview question (assuming this is required by the job).

In essence then, psychometric tests are useful because they provide so much more information than an interview can provide in a much shorter period of time. They have been designed by experts using modern statistical techniques aligned with modern personality research and theory. However, psychometric tests are only part of the story and a well designed interview using competent interviewers will add incremental validity to the assessment process. The interview will serve to confirm (or refute) the psychometric profile and provide rich behavioural evidence (that cannot be recorded by psychometric tests) that the person can perform at the level required by the person specification.

Other Methods of Assessment

So far we’ve only looked at different types of interview as an alternative or as complimentary to the assessment process. How about other methods of assessment?

Application forms
We all need to complete one of these to show our intention to apply for a job. Realistically though they are there for this reason alone. They serve as a record of information which the organisation deems important to hold on the individual. Current application forms hold no value as selection tools with the exception perhaps of educational and experiential background. This can be changed by designing application forms that elicit only job relevant responses and preparing a scoring system for the from even before sending it out.

CV/Resume
Candidates like to send their CV/Resume because many people have these on file and it’s easy to quickly update it and print it off on a per-job basis. However, again these are not particularly useful in selection. Research shows that decision-makers are often seduced by smart graphics as well as vocab which sells the applicant by over-inflating their achievements. It’s also possible to lie in a CV, although research has shown that most people don’t lie about their educational qualifications or experience as they know the prospective employer can check up on this. What they do tend to lie about or at least mislead about is their level of competence. We suggest that CVs are not used at any stage of the selection process.

Assessment Centres (ACs)
This is where the candidate is invited to a physical location to partake in a number of exercises with other candidates. Most ACs last a day and during that time the candidates will undergo both group and individual exercises such as presentation exercises, negotiation exercises or in-tray exercises. Assessment Centres have been shown to be highly valid and reliable methods of selection when using well trained assessors.
PsyAsia runs training in Assessment Centres and we also offer consultancy in Assessment Centre Design

References
References lack validity in the assessment process and yet organisations continue to request them! Typically a candidate will not give a potential employer the name of somebody who will give them a poor or perhaps even an honest reference. The tendency is to only offer names of those who they trust will give a great reference. On the other hand, if the current employer really wants the candidate to move on they may fake the reference, making the candidate appear almost angelic! Does this mean we should not use references in the selection process? No. It is possible to improve upon the use of references by designing work-related reference forms that elicit behavioural evidence from the previous employer that is in line with the competency requirements of the new job. However, this may lower the response rate as the referee really needs to think about actual behaviours and write them down rather than sending the standard “he’s a great guy” reference.

Graphology
Most organisations aren’t into this, but an alarmingly high percentage of French organisations are! The idea here is that various personality traits can be seen via somebody’s handwriting. Those traits can then be linked to performance at work. So for somebody that writes with very bold strokes, the graphologist may say they are ambitious. This would be good for a salesperson. However, research has shown a lack of reliability in this method. Not only do people write differently depending on their mood, their culture, their upbringing and so on, but graphologists given the same handwriting to analyse often do not agree with each other about the personality traits of the writer!  Graphology thus should not be used as a selection tool.

Phrenology
Phrenologists assume that different aspects of personality are stored in different parts of the brain and that where somebody has more of a particular characteristic, the corresponding part of the brain will be larger and hence cause protrusions on the head!  The idea would be that you measure different bumps and indentations on your candidates and then project their personality from that. Of course, this method holds no validity and brain imaging tools such as fMRI and PET scans have refuted it.

Astrology
In Asia, people use astrology to help them decide auspicious dates for business openings, functions, weddings and so on. Does it work for job applicants?  No! The idea that people born at the same time, in the same place, where the alignment of stars and planets are similar will work in the same way does not hold any weight. Don’t hire employees based on their star signs!

Psychometric Tests and other Selection Methods

As you can see, there are many ways we can assess people. However each method varies in terms of reliability and validity. Assessment Centres hold very high reliability and validity if done properly, but they are expensive, require lots of resources and skills to run and only assess 6-12 people at a time. We’ve already said that structured interviews are good but again, they take time and resources. Psychometric tools do cost money.  However the cost is offset by the number of candidates that can be assessed and the information that can be gathered in the assessment compared to other selection methods. Don’t forget, an interviewer’s time is costly. A panel interview with 3 interviewers is likely to cost around 2-3 times the fee of a psychometric test and yet will not gather as much information. Not to mention the fact that if you are using the right psychometric tool, it’s reliability and validity will already have been assessed and will be good. Whereas we tend to assume that interviews will be reliable and valid if run by trained people – this is rarely tested!

Psychometric Tests for development, coaching, careers advice and team-building

This lesson has focussed on the use of psychometric tests in candidate selection. However, much of what has been raised applies to the use of tests in other scenarios.  For example, in careers advice, psychometric tools allow the counsellor to offer advice which is based on a systematic assessment of the individual’s aptitude and personality alongside the information already on file such as achievements thus far, previous experience, educational qualifications and so forth. In coaching, development and team-building, psychometric tools often serve as a reliable and valid basis for the discussion. Not using these tools means the initiator starts off with far less information and is likely to be less systematic. Psychometrics enables the initiator to work from a validated model and a holistic assessment of the people being developed and not to base interventions and advice on subjective insights.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE. VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

In this session we will explore the following:

1. The different categories of psychometric tests

Different categories of psychometric tests

There are two major categories of psychometric tests:

Tests of MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

and

Tests of TYPICAL BEHAVIOUR

Maximum Performance Tests

Tests of Maximum performance include tests that have right and wrong answers. This means aptitude tests, ability tests and attainment tests. It’s possible to break down the category of maximum performance tests further by distinguishing between Speed Tests and Power Tests.  A speed test is more common in occupational testing. It is a test that has a time limit.  The idea is that most candidates will not complete all questions by the end of the allotted time. Candidates will trade off speed with accuracy. It is quite conceivable however that candidates would do somewhat better if they were allowed more time.  On the contrary, power tests are not timed. The idea here is that you either know the subject matter or you don’t and that even if you were given more time your score would be unlikely to improve.  As an example, I know nothing about quantum physics.  If you sit me in a room and ask me to sit a test on this topic I won’t do well – I’ll do badly and I’ll do badly irrespective of how long you give me to complete the test!

So, what is the difference between the main types of maximum performance tests?

Aptitude Tests
These assessments are future looking. They ask if the candidate has the aptitude to do something in the future, perhaps after a period of education or experience. If I want to know if my graduate respondent will make a good leader I may ask him to sit a number of aptitude tests. I am quite certain that the recent graduate will not be able to be a leader right now. But that is not what I am asking.  I need to know if after a few years of on-the-job experience and leadership development training this person has the aptitude to be a successful leader. An example of an aptitude test would be Saville Consulting’s Swift Analysis Aptitude Test or their Customer Aptitudes Test.

Ability Tests
In the aptitude example above I noted that I know my recent graduate will not make a good leader now. Ability tests are about the “here and now”. They tell us what the candidate is able to do now. Ability tests appear at the top of the hierarchy in maximum performance assessment. An example of an ability test would be the General Ability Test (GAT) or the Graduate and Managerial Assessment (GMAT).

Attainment Tests
These are the tests that you are probably more familiar with. The tests we sit during our schooling and university years are attainment tests.  The question is: following this period of learning, how much does the person now know? So, GCSE tests, A’Levels, University Degrees, Pilot Licence Tests, Piano Tests and so on are all examples of attainment tests.

However, just as you are beginning to think this isn’t too difficult to understand, let me add a thought for you!  It is possible for a single test to actually be any of the above 3 categories depending on how you intend to use it! For example, if you have just completed a training course for apprentice mechanics and then give them a mechanical aptitude test in order to assess their learning, you are actually using it in a similar way to an attainment test. If you didn’t train these apprentices and you wish to see if they have the aptitude to be good mechanics and you have them sit this test, you are using it as an aptitude test.  If you are about to select a mechanic who needs to perform right now without further training you could use this same test as an ability test!

Typical Behaviour Tests

These are not really tests in the purest sense because with typical behaviour (also called typical performance) there is no right or wrong. In view of this we try to speak about questionnaires and assessments for this category instead of tests! This category includes personality assessments and interest questionnaires.

Personality Assessments
These obviously assess personality. Some personality assessments assess a few types of personality and these are called PERSONALITY TYPE assessments (for example, the Myers Briggs Type Indicator – MBTI or the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire – EPQ). Other personality assessments assess traits. A type is a collection of traits.  A trait is a relatively enduring characteristic of the person (such as extraversion or resilience) which can be used to predict behaviours. Trait tools are able to assess at a finer level and this is one reason why type tools should not be used in assessment for selection decisions despite being useful guides in development and team-building. Trait tools can be further split into 2 more categories – NARROWBAND and BROADBAND. Broadband Personality Questionnaires assess traits broadly – this means there are overall fewer traits to assess – perhaps 5 or 6 in total. An example of a broadband personality tool is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). Narrowband tools assess more traits/contain more scales. They typically assess each scale with fewer questions than broadband instruments. Some narrowband assessments may have around 16 scales (e.g., the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire – 16PF) whilst others may have around double that, for example the Identity Personality Questionnaire and the Apollo Profile assess 36 and 34 scales respectively. A benefit of narrowband tools is their ability to assess at a very specific level within the person. This enables a more valid prediction of workplace performance. However, broadband personality tools have their own advantage which is that because they contain more questions per scale/trait – reliability for each scale/trait is generally higher than with narrowband tools.  We’ll discuss reliability and validity in detail later in the course.

Note: Some personality assessments were not developed specifically for workplace assessment but are nonetheless used in workplace selection and development (e.g., 16PF, MMPI) whilst other questionnaires were developed specifically to be used in workplace selection and development (e.g., Apollo, OPQ32, Hogan Personality Inventory)

Interest Questionnaires
As the name implies, these tools assess the respondent’s interest in various aspects of the working world in a structured and meaningful way and are therefore typically used in career counselling. They are also used in selection assessment to ascertain whether the candidate will comfortably fit the particular organisation they are applying to work in.  For example, if I am interested in doing structured work in a well structured organisation I may not be very happy working for an organisation which values spontaneity and creativity. Some personality assessments also report on the respondent’s interest by way of “derived scales”.  Derived scales come about by way of predicting statistically what the respondent would score in particular areas (such as interest) based on how they responded to the general personality assessment. An example of an Interest Questionnaire is the Strong Interest Inventory.  An example of a personality questionnaire that uses derived interest scales is the Identity Self-perception Questionnaire.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE.  VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

PsyAsia International is pleased to announce a  free, 10-week mini-course in psychometric testing. The course will be mainly text based and introduce the basics of psychometrics in 10 weekly articles. You’ll learn about what psychometrics is, where it came from, how it is useful, discrimination, reliability, validity, error and more. PsyAsia is Asia’s leading independent provider of psychometric tests and psychometric training. The course however will be invaluable to readers anywhere. It will be interesting for those in HRM or consulting roles using or considering psychometric tests as well as for those about to undergo testing.

To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your first free session is only a week away! You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong - these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

FREE HRM WEBINAR

PsyAsia International is pleased to announce the next webinar in our series of professional HR webinars. This time we will be discussing the topic of Chinese Personality and performance at work.

Some HR people in Asia believe that culture plays such a significant role in personality that indigenous personality attributes need to be assessed at recruitment/selection. To this end, personality tests have been developed “in Chinese for the Chinese by the Chinese”. A significant question to ask is: Do these tests add any prediction over and above that afforded by mainstream personality tests developed by world renowned experts in the field?

The above questions will be answered through discussion of the trait model of personality and its biological basis. Peer-reviewed and published research conducted by PsyAsia International’s award-winning Psychologist, Dr. Graham Tyler; award-winning Dr. Peter Newcombe of the University of Queensland; and world-renowned Professor Paul Barrett, formerly of the University of Auckland will be presented in an easy to understand format.

Click to register…

Online Training in Psychometric Tests

Asia-based Psychometric Test distributor PsyAsia International has announced that they will begin offering a live online training and accreditation program for the Apollo Profile from 1-4 June. The training will be run by an experienced business psychologist who is accredited with the Apollonean Institute to accredit users of this personality test.

One of the major benefits of Apollo over other personality assessments is that it compares the candidate’s scores on each of its 34 business personality scales to those who have been rated as excellent. Different comparison groups are available which means the client can compare their candidate(s) with excellent sales employees, call centre staff, supervisors, leaders and so on.  Most personality assessments compare candidates with the average person rather than excellence and hence this makes Apollo a rarity as well as a highly-valid tool.

PsyAsia International has been offering world-class training in Asia since 2002. The company only uses fully qualified and registered organisational psychologists to ensure quality and competence. This means that PsyAsia’s psychologists typically have as much training as a medical doctor, not to mention the hours of professional development they are required to undergo each year!  PsyAsia added online training to their repertoire in 2008 and followed this with their first live online training course at the end of 2009 – the Psychometric Test Administration Course.

The test administration course follows the British Psychological Society’s syllabus for their Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing and allows the attendee to request that PsyAsia also assess them for the BPS Certificate in Occupational Test Administration.  Training runs over 3 consecutive daily sessions of about 70-80 minutes, starting at 5pm Singapore/Hong Kong time which is 9am UCT/GMT. Each session is recorded and attendees can log-into PsyAsia’s online learning centre to view them as well as to chat with other attendees and post questions in the interactive forum.

The online training for the Apollo Profile will follow a similar format to the company’s Live Online Psychometric Test Administration Course. Apollo training will run over 4 consecutive daily sessions. There will be some pre-course work along with homework and a final piece of post-course work. Attendees without a background in psychometric testing will also need to complete the test administration course but there is no additional fee for this.

PsyAsia team member Cynthia Wong was asked to comment on who she thought would benefit from the training.

“Anybody who is interested in using a top-rate personality assessment such as the Apollo Profile will definitely benefit.  This assessment has numerous uses which include recruitment/selection, development, team-building and career coaching.  Moreover, those who may find it difficult or inconvenient to attend our face-to-face training in Asia now have an option to receive the same training and accreditation online.”  said Ms. Wong.

Registration is now open for the June Apollo Profile sessions.  Due to the online nature, attendees don’t need to be based in Asia. All training is conducted in English so registration is open to anybody who is able to make the time slots and credit cards are accepted. To register, simply follow the links on the course page at: http://www.psyasia.com/apollo_profile_accreditation_course.php

If you would like to find out more about the Apollo Profile, please see here: http://www.psyasia.com/personality_tests_apollo.php

You may also be interested in attending the free Apollo Profile webinar from Jim Bowden, the publisher, on 17 May.  Full details at http://webinars.psyasia.com

Apollo Profile Personality Test Webinar

Saville Consulting Wave® – Highest Validity per 15 minutes of test-time!

The Saville Consulting Wave was developed by the originator of the OPQ and co-founder of SHL, Professor Peter Saville as an alternative to the static assessments available in the market. Wave assesses candidate’s motives and talents within a validation-centric framework. It was validated within 100 separate businesses.

The tool uses both normative and dynamic ipsative questions and has been shown to have greater validity in predicting performance and leadership than any tool it has been compared to in research. Furthermore, the shorter version of Wave, the Focus Questionnaire has more validity per 15 minutes of test-taking time than any comparison questionnaire.

Profile jobs, run 360 performance appraisal, assess personality type for team-building, assess entrepreneurial potential and provide extensive development advice all within one framework

The performance culture framework which underlies the Saville Consulting Wave allows the tool to be used extensively for different HR applications from recruitment/selection through to performance appraisal and development.
Follow the links below for further details:

Wave Professional Styles	Performance Card Set
Wave Focus Styles	Wave Performance 360
Wave Types	Wave Development
Wave Entrepreneurial	Wave Culture
Wave Job Profiler

View some sample reports from Wave here

For the early-bird offer (25% discount), please register at http://www.psyasia.com/register
and quote WAVESEB for Singapore courses and WAVEHEB
for Hong Kong Courses. Deadline is 15 May for Singapore and 31 May for Hong
Kong.

Note – delegates on our BPS Level B course in
Singapore always get 50% discount off the Wave Conversion
course which follows their Level B training. More details at http://www.psyasia.com/bpscourses

Course Reviews from Previous Attendees

“Informative, relevant to work, knowledgeable facilitator”

Danny
Hay Group

“Good introduction to the tool and practical session was useful”

Geraldyn Fong
Managing Consultant (Psychologist)

Hudson Global Resources, Singapore

“Insightful and informative. The methodology behind the Saville
Consulting Wave Report is light years ahead of other psychometric tests yet
it is a breeze to use! The interface between motives, competencies and culture
is exactly the missing link that recruiters are looking for.”

Diana Yeo
Ministry of Defence, Singapore

“A highly practical and enjoyable approach to the application
of an extremely useful tool for selection and development – well worth the investment,
highly recommended.”

Neville Pearsall
Director HR
RMIT International University, Vietnam

Not ready for training and accreditation
but still want to use the Wave?

Then please consider PsyAsia’s Psychologist-on-Call™
service instead. Our registered psychologists will take care of the complete process for you, including a call and behavioural interview for your candidates and a feedback session with the decision-maker. More details at http://www.psyasia.com/psychologist_candidate_screening.php.

As coaches, our coaching is not supposed to be about us. But often, what we call coaching is really advice or counseling. All three conversations have a use and a place, but it is important to know what you are doing and what your intent is. Why? For coaching to be effective, the performer needs to own the conversation and subsequent actions.

Please, managers, do not start a conversation with, “Bob, can I give you some advice?”  Bob will probably be polite, but he is surely thinking that he wants your advice about as much as a root canal with no numbing shot. Honestly, unless we are highly fascinating thought leaders (and even then), most people don’t want to hear our advice. They want help.

Read More…

Sourced from: HRM Today Featured Posts

Singapore and Hong Kong based award-winning PsyAsia International offers 360 Performance Appraisal via the Saville Consulting Performance Culture Framework. The company has recently set-up a new site dedicated to easy understanding of the 360 appraisal process. It’s easy to set up and the cost is very reasonable. Optional services such as feedback from a psychologist consultant or team building and development services can be added to the package.  The online performance appraisal system can be used by any organisation worldwide. 

The Saville Consulting Wave is based upon a validation-centric scientific framework known as the Performance and Culture Framework. As part of this framework, Saville Consulting offers the Wave Performance 360 (multi-rater) online assessment of performance at work. Wave Performance 360 online assessment enables a range of relevant individuals to rate a colleague’s performance at work. How an individual perceives themselves and how this compares to other people’s perceptions of them is a powerful feedback tool. 360 assessment enhances self-awareness and provides a great platform for personal development. 

Wave 360 provides a unique report where the dual reporting lets the individual being assessed understand on one profile exactly how they were rated and how this benchmarks externally. 

The report combines quantitative rating scales with qualitative comment. All raters have the option of contributing narrative text on areas they think the individual does well, could do less of and could improve on. As a further option, Saville Consulting provides a very detailed development report for the individual based on all ratings. 

This powerful 360 appraisal can be used on it’s own or in conjunction with Saville Consulting Wave® Styles. When used in combination it can help individuals understand the gaps between their performance and potential as a platform for utilising unused potential and realising critical areas of potential.

Further details at the special site: http://360-appraisal.com