Read the complete article on executive assessment. - DDI

Screenıng and Assessment
PHOTO BY STEVE MELLON; COPYRIGHT, PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION
Andrew Gill, an executive coach at Bridgeville, Pa.-based
Development Dimensions International Inc., watches video
monitors <strong>the</strong> company uses to keep track of candidates’
role-playing exercises that simulate real-life happenings of
a pressured executive post.
My Day in <strong>the</strong> Hot Seat
Managing Editor Kristen B. Frasch gives simulated executive assessment a shot
… and lives to tell about it.
Let me start by making this
perfectly clear: I majored in
English literature, not business.
I’m an editor, not a corporate
executive. So when I offered
myself up for a six-hour evaluation
at Development Dimensions
International Inc.’s Bridgeville, Pa.
headquarters (near Pittsburgh)
to gain some perspective on a
BY KRISTEN B. FRASCH
total-immersion
assessment-center
experience, I had
even more reason to
panic than <strong>the</strong> “real”
subjects <strong>the</strong>re that
day.
There were six
such candidates, in
addition to myself,
Kristen B. Frasch
when I arrived at 8 a.m.—each one tucked
away in one of <strong>the</strong> 12 “mock” offices fully
equipped with desks, computers, phones, fax
machines … and, oh yes, video cameras for
capturing our best, and worst, moments.
Walking toward my “office for <strong>the</strong> day”
through halls tastefully punctuated with
paintings, sculptures, even a food-and-coffee
bar (real snacks for <strong>the</strong> taking, should you
dare to grant yourself a break), I felt I was
54 Human Resource Executive ®

already being immersed in as professional
and corporate a setting as possible—without
its really being that, of course.
By <strong>the</strong> time I reached my door,
unpacked my briefcase and belongings, and
readied myself for instructions from Jean
Denuzzio, <strong>the</strong> executive coach and team
leader in charge of <strong>the</strong> assessment exercise,
I was already breaking into a cold sweat.
Granted, in <strong>the</strong> weeks leading up to
my trip, I had pored over my “role” (my
name would be Kelly Myers) and <strong>the</strong>
mock company I would be joining that
day—my first on <strong>the</strong> job—as vice president
of commercial operations for a robotics
manufacturer, GS Robotics Inc., a division of
Global Solutions Inc., in <strong>the</strong> year 2025.
The material was impressively
thorough—reams of financials, company
histories, hierarchy charts, product
descriptions, global breakdowns—enough
serious business concerns and details to
make a former English major and longtime
journalist yearn for some o<strong>the</strong>r approach to
this story than a firsthand account.
Curiosity got <strong>the</strong> best of me, though,
and I decided not to chicken out. I was as
interested in witnessing <strong>the</strong> simulation
assessment-center concept—a method
dating back to <strong>the</strong> U.S. Army’s War Office
Selection Boards and post-World War II
Office of Strategic Services, and later initially
put to corporate use by AT&T—as I was
in seeing how a non-business-schooled
candidate might pull this off.
As unreal as <strong>the</strong> company and its
products were by today’s standards, its
challenges and problems were very real.
Clearly, I thought, some keen business
heads went to great lengths to put
toge<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> kind of company background,
organizational design, financial pressures
and concerns, and even petty politics
and scenarios that could test any wouldbe
executive with exceptional MBAgraduate-level
capabilities. Revenue goals
were not being met and some divisions
were becoming obsolete, while not
enough creativity and innovation was
being applied to new-product design,
overseas opportunities and companywide
commitment to shared goals.
Once I was set up, <strong>the</strong> e-mails started
coming, one on top of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r. I had
fires to put out. Long-time division chiefs
were waging turf wars and I’d be getting
a phone call in precisely 15 minutes (Say
what?!) to consult one bearer of ruffled
fea<strong>the</strong>rs—<strong>the</strong> longtime managing director
of a European company we had acquired a
year before. Cig Chevalier, my boss let me
know in an e-mail, “continues to ignore <strong>the</strong>
commercial possibilities and is reluctant to
share technology” and <strong>the</strong> expertise of his
people with our internationally expanding
corporation. I had some comforting to do:
I was to assure him his company’s name,
Robotiques Astral Chevalier Limitee (RAC),
and reputation would stay intact. I had some
cajoling to do: I had to think of a way we
could tap into his company’s talent without
depleting his ranks and productivity. And
I had some tough managing to do: He
needed to hear from me that being an
active, collaborative part of our company
was not an option anymore. We expected
his cooperation.
With <strong>the</strong> clock ticking and my mouth
drying, I tried combing through <strong>the</strong> company
chart to make sure I had <strong>the</strong> divisions and
players straight.
But wait! O<strong>the</strong>r e-mails were appearing
in my bin. I’d be getting a visitor in 45
minutes (Oh boy!), a disgruntled divisional
director in my unit by <strong>the</strong> name of Marty
Kane, whose manufacturing arm—under
his leadership—needed some stern pointers
on how to adhere to <strong>the</strong> newly aligned
corporate structure.
Seems Marty was hardly inspiring
support for <strong>the</strong> new corporate sales and
marketing efforts that went into effect
about six months ago, and, as a result, <strong>the</strong>
reputation of Commercial Robotics—my
baby—was suffering.
There were o<strong>the</strong>r problems I had to
digest, some PR nightmares surrounding
malfunctions and mixed signals in certain
robots—including <strong>the</strong> “English-speaking”
domestic model sold to a wealthy
Frenchman. According to various news
reports, <strong>the</strong> robot mistook <strong>the</strong> English
word “shoe” for <strong>the</strong> French “chou,” which
means cabbage. The customer had ordered
cabbage for dinner. The robot cooked and
served up his shoes.
The name “GS Robotics” was all over a
snide but humorous account in a French
daily newspaper. (These guys at DDI thought
of everything.) What was dawning on me
through <strong>the</strong> course of my information
onslaught was <strong>the</strong> clear and pressing need
for better synergy between technical and
marketing teams throughout <strong>the</strong> company,
and <strong>the</strong> potential this had to boost sagging
margins. How I would translate and oversee
this was ano<strong>the</strong>r matter.
Long story short, I got through my
meetings and phone calls, and even
schmoozed my way through presenting a
business plan to my “boss,” Terry Turner, at
<strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> day—something I, personally,
had never written in my life until <strong>the</strong>n.
I basically summoned up all <strong>the</strong>
research, organizational, intuitive and
persuasive skills in my arsenal to get
through it. Granted, I was in over my head
in terms of viable bottom-line solutions
an executive might drum up to solve
some very real and pressing business
challenges. But, according to my boss,
who patiently sat through my defense, I
had some sound ideas on ways we might
improve communication and cooperation
between divisions, and between our U.S.
and overseas sites. (Or maybe he was just
being kind.)
When he left, I put down my notes and
pen and uttered <strong>the</strong> only remaining word in
my brain: “Wow.” Being brand new to this
experience, which would be hard to translate
to <strong>the</strong> world of journalism anyway, I came
away knowing <strong>the</strong>y just saw everything—
my strengths, weaknesses, knowledge,
temperament and threshold for multitasking
under pressure.
I also knew that, had I been vying for a
top-level executive post or promotion, I would
have just been through about as <strong>complete</strong> an
appraisal as <strong>the</strong>re could be.
The business knowledge and
improvisational skills of <strong>the</strong> role-players
also left me humbled and fairly speechless.
They were so locked into <strong>the</strong>ir characters, I
wasn’t about to budge from mine. There was
absolutely nothing relaxed about any of it.
Behind <strong>the</strong> Scenes
A lot goes into what I had just
experienced, and what about 2,650 executive
candidates experience each year in any of
DDI’s 75 offices in 26 countries throughout
<strong>the</strong> world, says Chairman and CEO William
C. Byham.
Key to <strong>the</strong> DDI process, and its
strongest differentiator, he says, is <strong>the</strong> “data
integration” factor. For every person put
through this type of grilling, three different
assessors are listening to different parts of his
or her performance and making his or her
own qualitative and quantitative evaluations.
“Then <strong>the</strong> assessors get toge<strong>the</strong>r and
‘sell <strong>the</strong>ir evaluations,’ ” which include
scores from one to five on a whole string of
competencies as well as general arguments
for or against certain strengths, says
Byham. The group <strong>the</strong>n interprets those
competencies in terms of <strong>the</strong> business’ goals
and <strong>the</strong> job, or promotion, <strong>the</strong> person is vying
for. Real candidates get psychological tests
as well, to fur<strong>the</strong>r confirm, or deny, <strong>the</strong>ir
fit—something I was spared.
All assessment firms—experts tell me
<strong>the</strong>re are a few dozen worldwide, including
<strong>the</strong> smaller, regional sites—put <strong>the</strong>ir own
spin on <strong>the</strong> approach. Minneapolis-based
Personnel Decisions International, <strong>the</strong> only
o<strong>the</strong>r assessment firm on <strong>the</strong> global scale of
DDI, uses what Vice President and General
Manager R.J. Heckman calls <strong>the</strong> “anchoredrating-scale”
approach—even longer lists
of calibrated standards each individual is

Screenıng and Assessment
PHOTO COURTESY OF DEVELOPMENT DIMENSIONS INTERNATIONAL INC., PITTSBURGH
Members of a data-integration team confer after a candidate <strong>complete</strong>s a day-long
exercise at <strong>the</strong> Development Dimensions International Inc.’s assessment center.
scored against by one assessor.
Assessment experts have <strong>the</strong>ir takes
on this immersion process too, and where
it’s headed. John Boudreau, professor
of management and organization at
<strong>the</strong> University of Sou<strong>the</strong>rn California’s
Marshall School of Business, considers
it, “from a psychological-measurement
perspective, [successful in meeting] more
of <strong>the</strong> standards of good research design
than more informal methods of executive
assessment.”
But <strong>the</strong> future still probably holds some
necessary adjustments, he says. “Due to <strong>the</strong>
need to span many different industries and
economic strategies, such approaches are
often somewhat generic, and may or may not
get at <strong>the</strong> vital specific factors that will really
lead to competitive advantage through better
leadership.
“A standard set of competencies
across many organizations (including
competitors),” he says, “can create a
better-quality outcome for all, but may
not create <strong>the</strong> specific strategic outcome
that might have a high payoff for any one
organization.”
Indeed, <strong>the</strong> jury’s still out on how
prevalent this kind of assessment will be
in <strong>the</strong> future, according to Peter Cappelli,
George W. Taylor professor of management
at <strong>the</strong> Wharton School in Philadelphia and
director of Wharton’s Center for Human
Resources.
“The research on assessment centers
56 Human Resource Executive ®
as predictive devices is a little mixed in
terms of predicting future job performance,”
Cappelli says. “It suggests that assessmentcenter
information doesn’t add a lot beyond
what we could already know about current
performance in roles—although some
employers have such lousy assessments of
<strong>the</strong>ir employees that <strong>the</strong>y essentially know
little about <strong>the</strong>m.
“An alternative, which can be, in
<strong>the</strong> right circumstances, cheaper than
assessment centers, is to give people
<strong>the</strong> opportunity to try out actual roles or
“Assessment centers
excel because
people take action to
improve <strong>the</strong>mselves
when <strong>the</strong>y feel
<strong>the</strong>y’ve been allowed
to perform [and be
seen] at <strong>the</strong>ir top
level. You accept <strong>the</strong>
process when you
feel you’ve been
seen. ”
tasks in a context where <strong>the</strong> downside
risk is low,” he says. “Nothing beats
current performance as a predictor of
future performance, and nothing is more
realistic—for <strong>the</strong> individual as well—as
actually trying out a position.”
Never<strong>the</strong>less, he adds, “I think
individuals can always learn from <strong>the</strong>se
assessment-center approaches about
<strong>the</strong>mselves.”
Looking to <strong>the</strong> future, both DDI and PDI
are already getting very good at customfitting
assessment exercises to correlate
more closely with <strong>the</strong> business needs and
goals of <strong>the</strong>ir client companies.
Like many o<strong>the</strong>r assessment firms, <strong>the</strong>y’re
also expanding <strong>the</strong>ir post-assessment training
and coaching services as well.
“What we’re very interested in now is
whe<strong>the</strong>r people take action with this,” says
Byham. “Assessment centers excel because
people take action to improve <strong>the</strong>mselves
when <strong>the</strong>y feel <strong>the</strong>y’ve been allowed to
perform [and be seen] at <strong>the</strong>ir top level. You
accept <strong>the</strong> process when you feel you’ve
been seen.”
Both Byham and Heckman see
companies in <strong>the</strong> future holding more
assessments designed to help <strong>the</strong>m evaluate
overall leadership strength and alignment
with newly enhanced goals as opposed to
<strong>the</strong> more simplified process of selecting
<strong>the</strong> best-qualified job candidates vying for
particular posts.
As Heckman puts it, “a lot of CEOs call
us and say, ‘We need to really understand
how strong our senior executives are,’ ” as
leaders of a whole new corporate initiative
or direction, let’s say. There might not even
be promotions or jobs at stake in a growing
number of client requests that come through
assessment-companies’ doors.
Never<strong>the</strong>less, <strong>the</strong> purpose will always be
to get <strong>the</strong> most <strong>complete</strong> look possible at how
someone works, <strong>the</strong> process through which
decisions are made and communications
are sent, <strong>the</strong> basic knowledge base, <strong>the</strong>
preparation time allotted for each new
challenge and a person’s ability to juggle
ever-shifting priorities during a typical whiteknuckle
corporate day.
Leaving DDI, I saw a few candidates
still sweating it out in <strong>the</strong>ir “offices,” taking
fateful knocks or phone calls from pretend
sources of pretend problems <strong>the</strong>y’d have to
solve in very real ways. I could almost feel
<strong>the</strong> heat rising up <strong>the</strong>ir backs as I turned
mine, happy to have survived my schooling
into just how revealing today’s executive
assessment can be.
Send questions or comments about this story
to hreletters@lrp.com.
REPRINTED FROM HUMAN RESOURCE EXECUTIVE®, JUNE 16TH, 2007, COPYRIGHT© 2007 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.