The Achiever has been established and validated in accordance with the procedures described in "Standards of Educational Psychological Tests and Manuals," which is referred to in paragraph (2) 1607.6, "Minimum Standards for Evaluation," Federal Register Volume 35, dated Saturday, August 1, 1970. It is therefore not discriminatory and is in compliance with E.E.O.C. and other Federal Regulations.
The Reliability and Validity Manual published by Candidate Resources, Inc., establishes the legal and written confirmation that this evaluation was professionally developed and validated in accordance with both Construct and Criterion methods of validation. Candidate Resources, Inc., will defend the validation or content of the Achiever for any company using this assessment, but cannot assist any company as a result of the misuse or abuse of the Achiever.
There are four forms of validity:
CONSTRUCT refers to the extent in which dimensions with similar names on different tests relate to one another. Two things that correlate highly are not necessarily identical, but do provide reassurance that they are related and are a "construct" or part of the makeup (like honesty, dependability, sociability, etc.) of an individual as related to actual job performance.
CONCURRENT is that approach whereby people who are successful within a given job within a given company or industry are evaluated and generally grouped TOP THIRD, MIDDLE THIRD, BOTTOM THIRD. The assessment scores of the people who fit each of these ranges are then compiled and Job Benchmark Standards of the TOP THIRD are used to hire, train or manage.
PREDICTIVE occurs when the employer hires people for a job based on normal hiring procedures (interviewing, reference checks, education/experience, etc.) and at the same time has them complete the assessment, but does not utilize any data from it in the hiring decision. Within six months, or any appropriate period of time later, the assessment is scored, and benchmarks established of the people who were hired in the new jobs who are still with the employer and whom the employer considers successful. Job Benchmark Standards are thus established through the Predictive approach.
CONTENT represents job function testing, i.e., typing, mathematics, design, CPA exams, physical work endurance, etc. Content validation is not the method utilized by Candidate Resources, Inc., since we do not provide content assessments to the marketplace.
Candidate Resources recommends that an organization establish and utilize a consistent standard hiring process when making hiring decisions. Information should be gathered in each step of the standard hiring process to have specific and measurable data to utilize in making a final hiring decision. The assessment used should count no more than one-third of the hiring decisions. The preliminary interview, job history check, in depth interview results and evaluation of education, experience and other pertinent factors should be considered as well.
Under the Uniform Federal Guidelines adopted in the 1970's, validation of any part of the hiring process (assessments included) was no longer deemed necessary unless a company was not meeting the 4/5ths1 Rule in either hiring or promotional practices. Consequently, there are three optional approaches to using assessments:
1. Establish your own successful employee Job Benchmark Standards by conducting a concurrent validation by job classification. By tying job-related criteria to the aptitudes and personality dimensions of the assessment, the ultimate in validation and job relativity is assured. Also, the Job Benchmark Standards simplify the interpretation and use of the assessment in the hiring process, since it establishes a model for hiring, promotion and training purposes.
2. Establish Job Benchmark Standards by job classification by answering job-related questions on the requirements of the job. Candidate Resources's PC software will then develop Job Benchmark Standards based on the requirements of the job and traits required in the individual to successfully perform the job.
3. Use of Job Benchmark Standards comprised of successful people in jobs across the United States. Then, after a reasonable period of time, compare the successful people selected to the Benchmark Standards used for that job for confirmation of correctness and/or modification of the benchmark standards.
1. The in depth validation identified above is not necessary if you are in compliance with the 4/5th Rule described below. This rule was designated by the E.E.O.C. as a computation tool to establish a basis to show whether or not a company is having an adverse impact in their hiring practices.
EXAMPLE: Out of 120 job applicants (comprised of 80 white and 40 minority), 48 whites were hired and 12 minorities were hired.
48 out of 80 white applicants = 60%
12 out of 40 minority applicants = 30%
This hiring pattern results in adverse selection of minorities, since 1/2 as many minorities are hired as whites (or 30/60), whereas the hiring ratio must equal 4/5th as many minorities as whites.
Copyright 2017, Candidate Resources, Inc.
Not responsible for errors or omissions - specifications subject to change without notice.
"We found their testing is an accurate tool in evaluating math aptitude and found it also provides excellent feedback on an applicant's skill set. It has been a vauable tool in matching applicants to open positions."