TRUMBULL, CT USA — March 16th, 2020 — New research from Questionmark, the secure enterprise-grade assessment platform, reveals that too often firms fear they are having to make management decisions without the right management information on what their employees can deliver. This can undermine effectiveness and harm productivity.
Good decision making must be based on accurate and relevant information, but firms frequently do not effectively assess their people’s capabilities. Instead, human resource (HR) teams rely on assessments that are just about ‘good enough’, which means they do not base decisions on valid, reliable, fair and defensible information.
These ‘good enough’ assessment solutions include pen and paper, basic learning management systems (LMS) or other simple software tools. But these often create issues for HR and learning and development teams.
Jennifer Johnson, Chief Customer Officer, Questionmark, said: “When you think about how much financial data is used to inform decisions, it’s extraordinary that firms put so little premium on the management information that matters most: what their people can do.”
Questionmark research reveals the main problems with ‘good enough’ assessments that HR teams report.
Failing to assess what they want or need to know: one of the biggest concerns for firms is that pen and paper or basic LMS assessments are not robust. Organizations cannot be sure that the ‘good enough’ assessments they create are valid, fair or that they are even assessing what they should be.
Vulnerability to cheating: with pen and paper exams, LMSs or basic and unsecure software solutions, candidates can easily share details of assessments with those yet to take a test. This undermines the credibility of results and does not give organizations the insight they seek.
Time-consuming: pen and paper tests take time to organize, mark and to distribute results. Often these assessments mean supervised sessions need to be organized which creates logistical problems for both employers and staff.
Jennifer Johnson, Chief Customer Officer, Questionmark, continued: “Organizations know they need to assess their staff, but they undermine their own goals by choosing solutions which are rarely ‘good enough’.
“In the short term they can be time-consuming and difficult to operate. In the long run, organizations may not be testing the knowledge or skills to the scale needed to do their job properly.
“They may find it difficult to take relevant action based on reliable information. Organizations that fail to use robust assessments could face disputes or, in areas of regulated activity, even compliance fines.”
Why assessments need to be valid, reliable, fair and defensible
Organizations recognize that assessments help them to make informed decisions and unlock their organization’s potential.
But these decisions must be based on valid, reliable, fair and defensible assessments. If they are, they can make a real and lasting difference to an organization’s performance.
Questionmark enables partners to overcome the issues with pen and paper, LMS or other basic software assessments.
Jennifer Johnson, Chief Customer Officer, Questionmark, continued: “Customers tell us that with valid, reliable, fair and defensible assessments, we help them to make informed decisions. Moreover, they tell us that those decisions have a positive impact on their organization and help improve performance.”
The report is based on research from Questionmark customers who now use the platform to gather the information that will enable them to make good decisions.