Accuracy, Reliability and Validation
“If a person is not performing as expected,
it is probably because they are miscast for the job” – W.
Some definition first:
Accuracy – in the context we use it, does the
report/assessment give feedback that is true about the
We use assessments that participants generally
feel are 80 - 90% accurate. This is extremely
Reliability – will the results be consistent,
can we depend on them
recommend and use both Ipastive and Normative tests in combination
with each other. This increases the reliability.
Validate (Validation) - assess it again and again,
given different participants, making sure the method is
really measuring what it intends also, the degree the measurement supports
Since we only use vendors with high validity
studies (international) and consciously choose not to use some assessments
that we wonder about the reliability, our clients have a
strong sense of accuracy with the results. We will
be glad to pass along a specific vendors statistics.
Ipsative Tests – Self Assessments
These can be greater than 80% accurate in describing behavioral styles.
Not really recommended as a stand alone assessment to hire or promote
as it doesn’t address competence or skills or the individual’s
potential to gain these. However, these can be excellent tools for team
building, communication, interaction development and conflict resolution.
Examples are DISC behavioral assessments,
Myers-Briggs, Motivation Insights
Normative tests - measure quantifiable personality
characteristics on individual scales; these compare an
individual to a group norm. They generally have a higher validity than
ipastive tests. These have much higher validity and predictability.
With good normative tests, the ability to predict results can be as
high as 70%.
Recommended for use with succession planning
Examples of this type of testing are JobClues,
Prevue, ASSESS, TotalView
If The Job Could Talk Who Would The Job Hire? Call
512.278.1200 or 1-866-646-1200. No cost. No obligation.