When we describe a person (in situations like recruitment or development discussions, but also anywhere, really) we often use phrases like ‘she’s confident’ or ‘he’s extravert’ as if they were absolutes, when we are really comparing the person with something. Trouble is, we don’t always specify or even know what, if anything, we are comparing the person with.
So here are a few concepts from the world of psychometrics that could help us clarify our thinking: criterion-referenced vs. norm-referenced vs. ipsative comparisons.
In criterion-referenced comparison we are comparing particular qualities of a person to an objective external measure: ‘his approach to health and safety in the workplace was exactly in line with the organizational policy’.
In norm-referenced comparison we are comparing the person to a (specific) group of other people: ‘she was the most systematic of a pretty well-organised group.’
It can be useful to make both criterion- and norm-referenced comparisons: ‘although he met the necessary requirements for this competency as listed in the person specification, he was judged the poorest of all the candidates in this area’ or ‘she did not meet our minimum standards, but she was the best of the available applicants’.
Finally, ipsative comparisons compare different qualities within a single individual. For example ‘his personal drive for success outweighs his introversion’.
If we put all three types of comparison together we can make very rich descriptions of people: ‘although decision making is probably the least of his talents, and did not meet the high levels of ability shown by his peers, it still exceeds the minimal standards we have set for this role.’
So: you and your managers can experiment with enriching the way they describe people in your organisation by using some ideas from psychometrics. Pass it on!
No comments:
Post a Comment