Employee selection is an important human resources decision, especially in policing where employees are protected by civil service regulations and union contracts once they have served a probationary appointment. If an agency makes the wrong selection decision, it may have to retain a mediocre employee. Thus, the selection process is the most critical of all personnel decisions, and no expense or effort should be spared when making employment decisions.
Selection refers to hiring new employees, promoting employees to higher ranks, and making decisions about transferring officers to specialized units. A promotion process in actuality is a selection process in that the department is selecting an officer from one rank for a higher position in the department. When assigning officers to specialized units, employers must ensure that the officers have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform these new jobs. None of these decisions can be taken lightly since they ultimately affect the overall effectiveness of the department.
An assessment center (AC) consists of a variety of tests with job simulations constituting a significant proportion of the procedures used by the focal or selecting agency (Joiner 2002). Many ACs also include cognitive tests, which increase the validity of the procedure (see Dayan, Kasten, and Fox 2002). When the AC is used for promotions, candidates typically are given a reading list from which test questions are drawn. Entry-level ACs often contain a general aptitude test. Thus, the AC is also used as a personnel development tool at the promotional level.
Essentially, an AC is composed of multiple tests that examine candidates on a wide range of knowledge, skills, and abilities. It represents a more comprehensive examination as opposed to other testing methods. Gaines et al. (2003) have identified several different types of exercises that are commonly used in ACs. The content of the exercises is determined by the position for which candidates are competing.
• Leaderless discussion group. This exercise simulates a staff or other kind of meeting. Candidates are given a topic, usually in the form of a problem, and required to discuss it and provide a solution. In the leaderless discussion group, the interpersonal processes and interaction are of more importance than the group’s solution to the problem.
• Role-play exercise. Here, the candidate interacts with a role player while being observed by the raters. The role player may assume the role of a citizen, coworker, subordinate, superior officer, or someone from another governmental department. The role player is given a script providing details of the situation and how he or she should respond to different points made by the candidate.
• Presentation exercise. This exercise requires officers to make some type of presentation while being observed by the raters. A variety of presentation situations can be contrived: roll call training, presentation to a group of citizens, academy training, or a presentation to governmental officials. Once the presentation is completed, the raters can ask questions adding to the simulation.
• In-basket exercise. This exercise consists of a variety of different types of paperwork that the officer would be expected to complete in the new position: assignments, requests for vacation or sick time, schedule changes, letters and communications from citizens, disciplinary problems, requests to make presentations, complete reports, and so forth. Candidates complete the paperwork, and it is graded in terms of completeness and consistency with departmental policies.
• Tactical or problem-solving exercise. Officers are given a situation and asked to describe what actions they would take to resolve it. They are expected to tell raters what orders they would issue, who they would inform about the situation, and what other police units or governmental agencies they would contact to assist in resolving the problem. Examples of tactical problems include a hostage situation, fight at a bar, officer involved in domestic violence, crime problem, and a traffic crash involving hazardous materials.
• Report checking exercise. In this exercise, candidates are provided several completed reports, which they grade, a common task performed by supervisors.
The selection of AC exercises is guided by the rank or position for which the test is being designed. For example, the reports exercise is generally used at the sergeant or corporal level, whereas the leaderless discussion group and in-basket exercises are used at higher ranks. Although these exercises are designed primarily for promotion processes, some departments have incorporated AC exercises into the police selection process. For example, candidates can be evaluated using a tactical or problem-solving exercise. Candidates would first be given training, and then they would observe a problem situation using role players or video. The candidates could be queried in terms of how they would handle the situation, interpersonal relations with any role players, and performance on a report that would be written describing the situation.
AC Validity
ACs are generally validated using content validation. Content validation has been established by showing that exercises simulate actual tasks or work activities associated with the position. Content validation begins with a job analysis where job incumbents are surveyed to determine the tasks they perform and the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform the tasks. Usually a job analysis will identify fifty to one hundred tasks performed by officers at any given level. Exercises are then developed to match the job analysis information. The following are examples of tasks performed by lieutenants:
• Assisting in supervising or directing the activities of the unit
• Meeting with superiors regarding the operation of the unit
• Ensuring that departmental and governmental policies are followed
• Holding role call
• Reviewing the work of individuals or groups within the section
The content validation process in police ACs has taken two forms. First, once the job analysis is completed, the tasks are linked to specific job dimensions. Examples of these job dimensions include leadership, decisiveness, communications skills, motivation, planning, scheduling, supervision, and community or public relations. The AC exercises are then graded on some combination of dimensions. Although this format is widely used, it is problematic. Sackett (1987) advises that when dimensions are used, it must be ensured that the total domain of a dimension is sampled if content validity is used. For example, if one of the dimensions used in the AC is decisiveness, it must be ensured that all types of decisions are addressed. Officers make all sorts of decisions ranging from the mundane (granting an officer vacation time) to the critical (supervising a hostage situation). If the full range of decision making is not measured, the AC may not meet the standard for content validity.
The second approach consists of measuring tasks rather than dimensions. Here, various tasks are linked to the various AC exercises, and candidates are graded on their ability to perform the tasks. Evaluating candidates on task performance is much more straightforward. This process also results in more reliable ratings. A multiple-exercise AC can measure from ten to thirty different tasks, or a representative sample of the job domain. Furthermore, it is less abstract and more conducive to providing feedback to candidates in terms of strengths and weaknesses.
Implementing the AC Process
An AC must be implemented correctly if it is to be an effective selection tool. Caldwell, Thornton, and Gruys (2003) have identified a number of problems that must be considered during implementation. First, it should be properly planned or coordinated. Most ACs operate for several days using a number of raters who observe large numbers of candidates. Second, it should be based on a job analysis that clearly defines the job tasks or dimensions. Third, exercises should consist of simulations that match job requirements and measure attributes that are important to the job. Fourth, assessors should be qualified and trained on the exercises and measurement criteria. Fifth, candidates should be well prepared. They should be provided schedules and informed about AC expectations. Sixth, AC preparers should preestablish how the scoring will be used to develop a list of successful candidates. Common techniques include pooled judgments by the assessors and statistical methods where the dimensions or task performance is weighted. Finally, candidates should be given feedback on their performance.
The AC is a process that can substantially enhance an agency’s selection processes. Research tends to indicate that it is one of the most accurate selection methods and that it has fewer EEO problems. Although costly and labor intensive, it can substantially enhance the selection process.
