Here is a brief excerpt from from an article written by Frank Kalman for Talent Management magazine. To read the complete article, check out all the resources, and sign up for a free subscription to the TM and/or Chief Learning Officer magazines published by MedfiaTec, please click here.

Photo credit: iStock

* * *

Most companies use assessments of some kind to measure their midlevel manager ranks. How they’re used is where variation comes in.

The point of contention is whether formal assessments such as personality tests, behavioral simulations or cognitive measures should be used in mid-manager promotion and evaluation, or if such tools should be strictly measures for feedback and development.

Alison Hooker, chief talent development officer for the Americas for professional services firm EY — formerly Ernst & Young — said these assessments are better for development. “When you start to introduce a more evaluative component, people tend to shut down and not be able to learn much from it because it becomes a threat. When you put people in a threatening situation, it’s very hard to learn and grow and take in information about yourself.”

Cheryl Getty, senior vice president of talent management and organizational development at Leidos Holdings Inc., said an organization can get more honest results and a greater willingness from employees to engage in these services if they are used for development rather than to evaluate them, and it forms the basis for selection or compensation.

Sherry Hollock, senior vice president of talent and organizational development at department store chain Macy’s Inc., cautioned against using formal assessments for evaluation because they can paint a flawed picture of a person’s ability. “Some people have test anxiety,” she said. “Some people will perform better on the job than they might in an assessment.”

* * *

Frank Kalman is an associate editor of Chief Learning Officer magazine. To learn more about him, please click here.