A Re-cap of the National SHRM Conference Through the Eyes of a First Time Attendee

This article was published in the Fall/Winter 2014 Edition of Kentucky SHRM Magazine

It’s 4:30am on the Tuesday of the SHRM Conference in Orlando. And the power has gone out. I know this because I’ve just been awoken by the most annoying of sounds. You know that BEEP that the smoke detector makes when it’s disconnected from power? BEEEEEP. I’m stumbling around my hotel room looking for my Ipod and headphones so I can drown out the BEEP.  Then it sinks in. No power means… what? No wake-up call? No hairdryer? And—so God help me—the Starbucks better have their own back-up generator! Since I’ve been robbed of sleep, I’m going to need caffeine before I present my concurrent session at 7:00am.

Let’s back up. This is my first time at the national SHRM conference. Walking into a room that holds 14,000 people is a powerful moment that I won’t soon forget. Slightly overshadowing that, though, was the sense of awe experienced when walking into a vendor hall that housed over 600 booths, some of them as large as a small city and as elaborate as a nearby Disney theme park attraction. Considering how many mini-Ipad raffles I entered, I’m bound to win one of them, right?

The general sessions were all very engaging and motivating.  On Sunday, attendees were treated to an inspiring and very vulnerable talk from Good Morning America host Robin Roberts. She encouraged people to “make your mess your message,” meaning that everyone is dealing with some challenge in their personal life and we can support and encourage others by being transparent and open with our struggles. Monday, the general session was presented by Tom Friedman, author of one of my favorite books, The World is Flat. He warned that “average is officially over,” and only those who approach their career with creativity and an entrepreneurial spirit will thrive in the new reality. On Tuesday, fellow Kentuckian and YUM! Brands CEO, David Novak coached us on how to recognize and reward employees so as to “take them with you.” Closing out the conference on Wednesday, former first lady Laura Bush shared about her life experiences and updated attendees on the current activities of her various famous family members.

With hundreds of concurrent sessions to choose from, attendees had no shortage of options and could truly tailor their learning experience. When asked what his favorite session was, Kentucky SHRM’s State Conference Director, Perry Sholes from Lexington, said Identity Loyalty—Unlocking the Keys to Creating Productive, Hardworking and Appreciative Employees. Taryn Pearson, HR Manager at PetFirst Healthcare in Southern Indiana enjoyed attending the session called HR Department of One. “It’s great to know that other HR Managers do this on their own and are successful,” she said. “The speaker also provided a lot of valuable resources for people like me who are an HR department of one.”

Of particular interest to many attendees this year was the new certification program being rolled out by SHRM as a replacement for (or alternative to?) the PHR and SPHR certifications traditionally provided through HRCI. Several sessions addressed this topic and John Bachman, LSHRM past president, worked to make sure he was hearing both sides of the story. John attended both SHRM sponsored and HRCI sponsored events on this issue. “It is hard to tell which story is THE story,” John says. “I feel like a child in a divorce; we were “raised” to love and support both, but now they are split. I’m not taking sides; I plan to be active in both and I wish them both great future success.”       

On Monday, approximately 30 conference attendees from Kentucky gathered for lunch.  After 24 hours of feeling disconnected and alone among a sea of strangers, it was very refreshing to be among friends. Throughout the rest of the conference, I met several more Kentuckians that hadn’t heard about the Kentucky lunch. Just a tip—if you plan to attend the 2015 SHRM Conference in Vegas, make sure to reach out and find out when/where the Kentucky gathering will take place. This is an invaluable opportunity to connect with local colleagues and truly maximize your conference experience.

That brings us back to Tuesday morning. When I was notified in late October that I’d been selected to present a concurrent session on Hiring Assessments, I was humbled, honored, and thrilled. When I realized that my session was to take place at 7:00am… I was baffled. Surely no more than 4 people would show up at 7:00am, right? Instead, I was grateful to speak to a gracious and enthusiastic crowd of about 400. And that’s nothing—Louisvillian Erika Tedesco from Hosparus presented at 7:00am Monday morning regarding Onboarding and Orientation Programs and had over 550 in her session.  Rounding out our Kentucky presenter team was Sandy Allgeier, a 10 year veteran of the SHRM faculty. Sandy presented a preconference workshop on being a HR Business Partner, a session she’s facilitated for the past 3 years. The Bluegrass State was well represented in the Orange State!

In reflecting on my first experience at the national SHRM conference, I truly found it thrilling (albeit, at times, overwhelming) to be a part of something so large and energetic. Right now, all I can think about is how I can make sure to be part of next year’s conference… Vegas, baby! Of all the renowned conference speakers, it was perhaps Tim McGraw (who performed for attendees Tuesday night) who summed up the conference experience up best—“I like it! I love it! I want some more of it!”

Thinking Critically About Hiring Assessments: 8 Questions to Ask Yourself

Assessments can provide tremendous value in the hiring process if used correctly. To determine whether or not you're getting the maximum value from assessments, ask yourself the following questions. 

Note:  The items with asterisks are taken directly from the Department of Labor’s Guide to Testing and Assessment (page numbers are cited)

 

*1)   Are we using assessments in a purposeful manner?

 
The DOL states: “Often, inappropriate use results from not having a clear understanding of what you want to measure and why you want to measure it. As an employer, you must 

first be clear about what you want to accomplish with your assessment program in order to select the proper tools to achieve those goals” (page 9-1).

*2)   Are we using a “whole person approach”? Or are we making decision on only one data point, or one dimension of a candidate? (DOL page 9-1)

*3)   Is the population we’re assessing with the instrument (i.e. our job candidates) similar to the group on which the instrument was developed or normed?  (DOL page 9-2)

*4)   Have the tools we’re using been demonstrated to be valid for the specific purpose(s) for which they are being used in our organization? (DOL page 9-3) In other words, can we show that scores on our assessment(s) are directly correlated with some outcome of interest in our workplace (i.e. turnover, job performance, sales volume, customer satisfaction, absenteeism, etc.)?

*5)     Do the tools we’re using measure stable traits and have high test-retest reliability?

The DOL states: “If a person takes the same test again, will he or she get a similar score, or a very different score? A reliable instrument will provide accurate and consistent scores. To        meaningfully interpret test scores and make useful career or employment-related decisions, use only reliable tools” (page 9-2).

6)        Are we measuring constructs with high predictive validity?  I.e. Integrity, General Mental Ability, or a combination of several constructs?

7)        Are we using assessments in the correct point in our hiring process for maximum benefit?

8)        Are the tools we’re using “working,” and how do we know? Can we tie assessment results to metrics that are important to our company? Can we calculate ROI?

If the answer to any of the above questions is "no" or "I don't know," you may want to take a critical look at your hiring process.  Contact me with questions, or to request a copy of the Department of Labor's "Testing and Assessment: An Employers' Guide to Good Practices."

DiSC Does it Right!

If you’ve ever taken a test where the results described your personality in terms of four possible styles, you’ve taken a 4-quadrant (4Q) personality assessment. Perhaps you found out that you’re blue... or C... or 4...or a golden retriever... or a blueberry banana muffin (ok, I made up that last one).  But, what exactly are 4Q personality assessments designed to measure? And, what is the best use of this kind of tool?

The following is a summary of a report published by Inscape Publishing, the distributors of the DiSC Personal Profile System. This is an excellent explanation of what DiSC (and by extension, other 4-quadrant personality assessments) measures and how that information should, and should not, be interpreted and applied.

DiSC is a measure of “surface traits” or characteristic ways of behaving in a particular environment. It helps individuals recognize the environmental cues to which they are reacting and the strategies they are using to adjust to their environment. It is not designed to describe human characteristics that are not readily observed. It is designed to describe an individual in relation to his or her environment.

DiSC addresses behavioral responses based on the individual’s emotional reaction to a particular environment. This model is not designed to support inferences about what an individual is like at the core of his/her personality or to predict how he/she will behave in the future. Further, it does not attempt to determine how effective the person’s behaviors are. It is not appropriate to suppose one can match a person to an “ideal” environment and count on the match to remain intact.

The appropriate use of DiSC is to increase self-awareness of behavior in a particular situation so one can better understand where they may want to adjust their behavior to work more effectively with others or to better adapt to a situation. In the DiSC, respondents are considered the experts on themselves and the instrument is self-scored and self-interpreted.

Inscape says DiSC is used in business settings for employee development and team building. They do not recommend the use of this tool for the purpose of employee selection/hiring, because it is not designed to predict how effective someone will be in a job. If you are using a 4Q assessment for hiring, you may want to reconsider for two reasons: 1) there are some risks in using these tools for hiring from a compliance standpoint, and 2) there are other tools that are far more effective (have higher predictive validity) for use in a hiring context.

Look for the panel discussion “Personality Assessments Gone Wild” at the upcoming KY SHRM Conference!

 
Indented content taken directly from a research report published by Inscape Publishing titled “A Comparison of the Personal Profile System and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.” The full document can be found at: http://www.discprofile.com/reliability-and-validity.htm

Cybervetting

(Based on a presentation by Dr. Michael Zickar at the July 2013 IPAC Conference)

Defined as reviewing content found on Social Media or other online sources when screening perspective employees, this is an area where the practice has significantly outpaced the research.  Since it is fairly naïve to categorically tell hiring practitioners not to do it, some researchers are focusing their attention on providing some structure to the practice and determining what kinds of information, if any, can be shown to be valuable predictors of future job performance.

One proposed model of how to organize information found online is to classify it into one of four categories: Professional, Proactive (or “helping” behavior), Deviant, and Irrelevant. For example, previous employment information found on LinkedIn would be considered Professional, posts about fundraising activities the candidate is involved in would be categorized as Proactive, comments about illegal activity or substance abuse would be classified as Deviant, and pictures of kids, opinions about movies, etc. would be deemed Irrelevant (likely the largest category since very little information found online is directly related to job performance).

The cautions of using such information are many. For one, how do you assign meaning to information you glean? For example, if someone writes a lot of product reviews on Amazon, do you infer that the person is exceedingly helpful? Overly critical? Or merely verbose with a lot of time on their hands? Also, how do you account for having a wealth of online data on one candidate and virtually none for another? Can you ascribe meaning to this in-and-of itself? Does the lack of an online presence show prudence and restraint? Is it an indication that someone has something to hide? How do you reconcile that the amount of information you are able to uncover about someone may be due largely to something that could potentially be discriminatory, like belonging to a particular generation, or the uniqueness of someone’s name?

In conclusion, cybervetting is a highly subjective and unstructured process with no data (at this time) to support that the information gleaned has any direct relation to job performance.  Hiring practitioners would be wise to use caution, and to rely on screening measures that have proven predictive validity, like structured interviews, cognitive ability tests, and integrity tests, and other multi-measure assessments.

For Crying Out Loud!

It’s 3:43am and my 7 month old is wailing, as she’s done for the past 210 nights. I’ve read all the books and talked to doctors and well-meaning friends. I know, intellectually, that picking her up and giving her a bottle will be counterproductive to helping her learn to fall asleep on her own. But sometimes that long-term strategic thinking is difficult to maintain when I’m TIRED and all I want to do is STOP THE SCREAMING!!

It’s now 4:02 and I’m struck by the irony of the situation. I frequently have conversations with my HR colleagues who know they should take the time to create a more strategic, predictive hiring process. But the hiring manager is screaming for the position to be filled quickly. And even though this short-term thinking will result in having to re-fill the position in a few months, there is so much pressure and such insistence… sometimes it’s just easier to give in.

I suspect we will both reach a point where we say “no more!”  It doesn’t make sense to keep putting a band-aid on the situation when what we really need to do is address the problem with the precision of a surgeon—a full diagnostic work up, then the creation and execution of a plan the fixes the problem once and for all. We need to stop spinning our wheels and gain some traction on the problem so we can finally get some rest for crying out loud!

When you get to this point, I can help you analyze your hiring needs and find an instrument that will measure the right things to be effective in solving your problem… And I won’t even ask you to come over at 3am and help me solve mine!