U.S. patent application number 11/466338 was filed with the patent office on 2007-02-01 for position analysis system and method.
This patent application is currently assigned to PERFORMANCE DNA INTERNATIONAL, LTD.. Invention is credited to Bill J. Bonnstetter, Susan J. Fronk.
Application Number | 20070027747 11/466338 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 37769732 |
Filed Date | 2007-02-01 |
United States Patent
Application |
20070027747 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Bonnstetter; Bill J. ; et
al. |
February 1, 2007 |
POSITION ANALYSIS SYSTEM AND METHOD
Abstract
A method and apparatus for deriving key characteristics for
superior performance in a job includes deriving a set of
behaviorally-related competencies relevant to most jobs, surveying
persons knowledgeable about the job based on the set of
competencies, and defining the job in terms of the most significant
competencies identified by the surveys.
Inventors: |
Bonnstetter; Bill J.;
(Carefree, AZ) ; Fronk; Susan J.; (Woodbury,
MN) |
Correspondence
Address: |
MCKEE, VOORHEES & SEASE, P.L.C.
801 GRAND AVENUE
SUITE 3200
DES MOINES
IA
50309-2721
US
|
Assignee: |
PERFORMANCE DNA INTERNATIONAL,
LTD.
6016 E. Rancho Manana Road
Cave Creek
AZ
|
Family ID: |
37769732 |
Appl. No.: |
11/466338 |
Filed: |
October 18, 2006 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
11244525 |
Oct 6, 2005 |
|
|
|
11466338 |
Oct 18, 2006 |
|
|
|
09479646 |
Jan 7, 2000 |
|
|
|
11244525 |
Oct 6, 2005 |
|
|
|
60115300 |
Jan 8, 1999 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/7.27 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 10/063112 20130101;
G06Q 10/06398 20130101; G06Q 10/0633 20130101; G09B 7/02 20130101;
G06Q 30/02 20130101; G06Q 10/00 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/011 |
International
Class: |
H04M 3/51 20060101
H04M003/51; G06F 11/34 20060101 G06F011/34 |
Claims
1. A method of benchmarking a job comprising: identifying subject
matter experts for the job; facilitating discussion with the
subject matter experts to identify and prioritize key
accountabilities of the job; giving a survey to the subject matter
experts to determine soft skills necessary for superior performance
in the job, the survey incorporating the key accountabilities; and
combining responses to the survey from multiple subject matter
experts into a composite report identifying and prioritizing skills
for superior performance in the job.
Description
I. CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION
[0001] This is a Divisional application of application Ser. No.
11/244,525 filed Oct. 6, 2005, which is a Divisional application of
application Ser. No. 09/479,646 filed Jan. 7, 2002, which claims
priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/115,300 filed
Jan. 8, 1999, herein incorporated by reference.
II. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
[0002] The entire contents of U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880, issued Sep.
3, 1996, are incorporated by reference herein.
III. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0003] A. Field of the Invention
[0004] The present invention relates to a system and method of
testing or interviewing persons for a particular job or work
position, and in particular, to a system and method for improving
the likelihood the person will perform highly in the particular job
or assisting the person to increase performance in the particular
job, particularly jobs that require human interaction.
[0005] B. Problems in the Art
[0006] It is difficult to accurately predict how successful a
person will be in a particular job or work position. Traditional
hiring practices involve reviewing a potential employee's resume
and personally interviewing the candidate. Studies have found this
a remarkably ineffective, or at least unpredictable, method of
hiring highly performing individuals for particular jobs. For
example, a recent university study suggests that while 90% of
employees are hired by personal interviews, only 14% of those hired
turn out to be highly successful in the particular job.
[0007] It is believed that the reason for the low success rate is
due in part to human nature. interviews have conscious or
unconscious biases that effect judgment or ability to predict a
success employee. Or interviewers do not know the important matters
about the job and/or the person in relation to the job to
effectively interview the potential employee. See, for example,
Plotkin, Harris, "Building a Winning Team", Griffen Publishing, 544
Colorado Street, Glendale, Calif. (1997).
[0008] People have been using skills for selection of employees for
years. However, they can not validate the process. They are biased
and can not identify if they are measuring a skill, behavior or
attitude, for example. If skills always led to performance, all
CPA's, attorneys, medical doctor, nurses, engineers and artists
would be successful. If intelligence always led to success, all
valedictorians would be successful.
[0009] The behaviorist who has used behavior as a part of the
selection process is biased and does not acknowledge the need to
look at skills, intelligence, attitudes and beliefs.
[0010] The amount of people who understand and use attitudes for
selection are biased and do not look at the other views either.
Generally all the people who are involved in selection are biased
and have trouble truly looking at a job or position the way they
should be viewed. No one addresses the passions of individuals that
can be met by certain jobs. Selection asks, "What does it take to
be a key performer in a certain job?" While ways exist to measure
talent, there has not been a way to be able to find a place to drop
the talent in i.e., match a job to the talent.
[0011] Numerous and increasing attempts have been made to create a
system for hiring or identifying which persons will be successful
for particular jobs. A number of testing systems have been
developed and are in use. Many focus on the technical competency of
the potential employee. Many focus purely on the behavioral
characteristics of the employee.
[0012] One such system is described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880
(incorporated by reference herein). This system extracts
information from the potential employee through a questionnaire. In
the case of this patent, the questionnaire probes the behavioral
and value characteristics of the individual. Those characteristics
are compared to behavioral and value characteristics that are
exhibited by persons successful in the particular job. A computer
can be used to keep track of the questionnaire answers, their
ratings, and their comparison to standards, and a printout can be
created which allows the employer to evaluate the potential
employee to see if they match up with successful models for the
job. Alternatively, the system can be used to test existing
employees to see if they fit a job, or to help them improve in a
job.
[0013] While the patented system described previously has been
found to be a much better predictor of employee success for a job,
there are still needs in the art. The previously described system
is focused on the people and their characteristics. More emphasis,
or at least significant emphasis on what characteristics the job
requires, may lead to even better predictions of employee
success.
[0014] There are currently discussions of "competency" for jobs.
See, for example, Parry, Scott B., "Just What is a Competency?"
June 1998 issue of TRAINING, pp. 58-63; Klein, Andrews, L.,
"Validity and Reliability for Competency-based system: Reducing
Litigation Risks", Vol. 28, COMPENSATION & BENEFITS REVIEW,
Jul. 17, 1996, pp. 31(7). While there is much discussion of
competency, an effective way to measure the talent of a person and
then find a job to maximize the talent of the person is not
known.
[0015] Therefore, there is a real need in the art for an
improvement regarding this question. It is therefore a principal
object of the invention to provide a system and method that
improves upon or solves the problems and deficiencies in the
art.
[0016] The many attempts to shift the focus of inquiry from
interviews and resumes to an evaluation of "competencies" of
potential employees beg the question-how does one define
"competencies" and which ones are relevant?
[0017] There is no agreement on these questions. Many attempts at
using "competencies" mix hard skills, e.g. technical competencies,
with what are sometimes called "soft skills", e.g. more behavioral
related. Others come up with generalized, "one size fits all
approaches.
[0018] Some companies hire consultants to tailor competency models
to a particular company or job.
[0019] The problems with present attempts include inaccuracy,
biases, cost, and ineffectiveness. A "one size fits all" approach
does not take into account that different jobs require different
competencies. It also does not allow for differences in company
goals or philosophies.
[0020] A significant problem in many present competency based
systems is bias of the creator of the system. For example, no
matter how experienced or educated, a consultant or system
developer has patent or latent biases. They invariably show up in
the definitions, questions, and processing of such systems. Also, a
consultant many times is affected by what the consultant perceives
as the desired outcome of the client.
[0021] Specific hiring of consultants is costly. Some charge
several thousand dollars a day. A customized system for a company
can cost tens of thousands of dollars. And, again, biases are
likely.
[0022] Also, the effectiveness of present systems is questionable.
Most are based primarily on the real or perceived needs of the
company, and not upon the needs of the position. Therefore, many
good candidates for effective or even superior performance in a
position are not identified.
III. OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
[0023] Therefore, there is a real need in the art for improvement
in the way competencies are identified for good performance in a
job or position.
[0024] The present invention provides a method and apparatus, which
improves over or solves problems and deficiencies in the art.
[0025] Other objects, features and advantages of the present
invention include, but are not limited to: [0026] 1. A focus on
first defining a job by competencies and the most important
competencies. [0027] 2. Utilization of such a defined job to (a)
screen potential employees for the job, (b) evaluate existing
employees in the job, (c) assist interviewer of job applicants ask
the right questions, (d) develop employees, (e) develop strategies
for matching employees to jobs, and/or (f) help with future
business planning. [0028] 3. Has greater accuracy. [0029] 4. Is
quicker. [0030] 5. Is economical. [0031] 6. Is more flexible.
[0032] 7. Is reusable. [0033] 8. Diminishes or eliminates bias.
[0034] 9. Assists in ultimate hiring decision. [0035] 10. Is
adaptable to number of jobs/uses. [0036] 11. Can be
computerized/automated. [0037] 12. Is useable with other
methodologies. [0038] 13. Provides technology, methodologies and
processes for aligning the behaviors, attitudes and performance of
individuals with organizational needs. [0039] 14. Identifies,
calibrates and prioritizes the competencies required to produce
superior performance relative to specific positions. [0040] 15.
Includes a process for assessing an individual's performance
against the competency requirements of their position. [0041] 16.
Provides the framework for career development plans focused on
developing the competencies required for superior performance.
[0042] 17. Reinforces the behaviors necessary for superior
performance. [0043] 18. Identifies the behaviors that may hinder
superior performance [0044] 19. Minimizes the time required to
develop competency models. [0045] 20. Assists in the development of
competency profiles that clarify job descriptions in terms of
behavior. [0046] 21. Provides a job-related basis for coaching and
mentoring. [0047] 22. Provides job-related links between the
recruiting, selection and performance management processes for
specific positions. [0048] 23. Can be implemented using paper and
pencil, Intranet or Internet. [0049] 24. Provides methodologies for
developing competency based succession plans for key positions.
[0050] 25. Provides the framework for tailoring training and
development programs to individual needs. [0051] 26. Collects and
interprets multiple inputs and perspectives on position
requirements and performance issues. [0052] 27. Clarifies where
training and development investments will be cost effective and
where they may not be justified. [0053] 28. Provides insight into
management or cultural biases on performance issues. [0054] 29.
Provides information that can assist new hires to understand what
behaviors they will need to demonstrate in a specific position.
[0055] 30. Provides a framework for assessing the impact of
internal or external changes on the behaviors necessary for
performance in a specific position. [0056] 31. Assists
organizations to develop a baseline for an inventory of their
current workforce competencies. [0057] 32. Provides a
competency-based framework for workforce planning. [0058] 33.
Provides objective, job-specific language for appraising
performance. [0059] 34. Assists in the development of a
competency-based compensation system. [0060] 35. Provides a
methodology for clarifying the shifts in importance of soft skill
competencies between positions represented in career ladders or
within job families.
[0061] These and other objects, features, and advantages of the
present invention will become more apparent with the accompanying
specification and claims.
IV. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0062] The present invention comprises a system and method for
analyzing a job or work position and then evaluating applicants for
the position to determine if their characteristics will make them
high performers in the position. The present invention is
particularly useful relative to jobs or positions that have human
interaction, either with persons inside the company, e.g.
co-workers, or persons outside the company, e.g. customers,
suppliers, etc.
[0063] First, a set or family of characteristics, herein called
Competencies, specifically related to observable behaviors in the
workplace for most jobs or positions is defined.
[0064] Second, one or more persons familiar with the position, and
preferably highly performing individuals in the position, are
interrogated regarding the Set of Competencies. Optionally, not
only are the individuals queried for skills needed to have high
performance in the job, but also the values/attitudes and others
traits or characteristics that seem to match up with high
performance in the job. Other characteristics that can be tested
are risks involved individually or for the company with the job,
beliefs associated with high performers in the job, and
intelligence.
[0065] Third, the responses are analyzed from the standpoint of the
interrogations. The manner in which the Competencies relate to a
given job can then be analyzed. At least some Competencies are
related to skills, attitudes/values, and/or behavioral traits.
Risks could also have identified factors, as could others, if
desired. Biases are dealt with or removed by using observable
behaviors in a job to define the job and by surveying a set of high
performers relative to these observable behaviors.
[0066] From those Competencies, essential Competencies for the
particular job can be identified. They are correlated with skills,
attitudes/values, and/or behavioral traits.
[0067] From this key Competencies identification, a plan of action
can be developed to better interview and identify those candidates
for the job that are most likely to be high performers. Specific
questions for interviews can be fashioned. If the key Competencies
are identified in the candidate, the candidate is likely to be a
high performer, even if the resume or the personal opinion of the
interviewer suggests otherwise.
[0068] Alternatively, the report can be shared with existing
employees or workers to assist them to develop the Competency for a
certain job, or to assist them to improve in the present job with a
very specific development program.
V. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0069] FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic view of a system according to an
embodiment of the present invention.
[0070] FIG. 2 is a flow chart of the method of using the system of
FIG. 1 according to the invention.
[0071] FIGS. 3A to 3U are an example of a Position Survey used with
the method of FIG. 2, including indicia to assist in an
understanding of a method of processing the Position Survey.
[0072] FIGS. 4A and 4B are tables used in processing the Position
Survey.
[0073] FIGS. 5A and SB are tables used in processing the Position
Survey.
[0074] FIGS. 6A to 6AB are an example of a master Position Report
used to create specific Position Reports for a variety of jobs or
positions from results of a Position Survey.
[0075] FIGS. 7A to 7N are a hypothetical specific Position Report
for a first job.
[0076] FIGS. 8A to 8P are a hypothetical specific Position Report
for a second job.
[0077] FIGS. 9A to 9P are a hypothetical specific Position Report
for a third job.
[0078] FIGS. 10A to 10P are a hypothetical specific Position Report
for a fourth job.
[0079] FIG. 11 is a flow chart for an optional procedure for
validating a Position Report.
[0080] FIGS. 12A to 12K are an example of a Personal Competency
Inventory that can be used with the method according to the
invention, including indicia to assist in an understanding of a
method of processing the Personal Competency Inventory.
[0081] FIG. 13 are tables used on processing of the Personal
Competency Inventory.
[0082] FIGS. 14A and 14B are a hypothetical example of a Personal
Competency Inventory Report.
[0083] FIG. 15 is an example of a Feedback Survey for a person
performing the job.
[0084] FIG. 16 is an example of a Feedback Survey for the superior
to the person performing the job.
[0085] FIG. 17 is an example of a Feedback Survey for peers,
subordinates, or others relative to the person performing the
job.
[0086] FIGS. 18A to 18I are a hypothetical example of a Feedback
Report for a Feedback Survey of FIGS. 15-17.
[0087] FIGS. 19A to 19D are a hypothetical example of an additional
Feedback Report for a Feedback Survey of FIGS. 15-17.
[0088] FIG. 20 is an example of a hypothetical Interview Record for
a first job applicant that could be used with the invention.
[0089] FIG. 21 is an example of a hypothetical Interview Record for
a second job applicant that could be used with the invention.
[0090] FIG. 22 is an example of a hypothetical Interview Record for
a third job applicant that could be used with the invention.
[0091] FIG. 23 is an example of a hypothetical Interview Candidate
Comparison used with FIGS. 20-22.
VI. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
A. Overview
[0092] The preferred embodiment will be described with respect to
analyzing a potential candidate for a position or job in a company.
It is to be understood that the invention can be utilized for a
variety of types of jobs or positions, indeed for most.
[0093] A set of observable behaviors, identified as being pertinent
to most jobs is defined. This Set of Competencies is used to an
analysis of the job or position in question. A questionnaire called
a Position Survey (see FIG. 3) is created by this analysis using
the Set of Competencies. The questionnaire is taken by people
(subject mater experts) who know the job at issue.
[0094] Based upon the answers to the questions, which probe a
variety of Competencies, a profile of the job is produced. By
having these in hand, the company can interview applicants to find
out which persons have not only the skills for the job, but also
the behaviors, values/attitudes, and risk level for the
company.
[0095] This allows a set of interview questions to be produced to
pull out information from the interviewee to allow an unbiased
assessment of whether the interviewee not only meets skills
requirements but also most likely has the passion for the job.
Stated differently, it is a way to characterize the job, not by
technical competency alone, but also by what might be exciting and
stimulating to certain types of people. It allows an almost
automated way (bypassing interviewer biases) of identifying the
right persons for the right job. Because the questionnaire of
several high performers provides the blueprint for the right person
for the job, when the person answers certain questions the right
way during the interview, the interviewer basically just watches
for those "right" answers, and when received is compelled to hire
the person, even if the interviewers biases suggest otherwise.
[0096] U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880 looked at behaviors and values based
on what persons saw in themselves. The present invention profiles
the job in more of a complete sense; i.e. not only behavior and
values, but also skills needed and optionally, the intelligence and
any hard skills. Still further, the point of reference of looking
at these different areas is from the needs of the job, not from how
people rate themselves about the job. It is relatively easy to
match a person's skills with a job, but what about motivation? Does
that person have the passion to do the best in the job? Applicants
sometimes do not know their own competencies or are reluctant to
disclose their weaknesses. The present invention bypasses these
problems with traditional, interviews by profiling the job for high
performance, and then subtly, probing the interviewee both head-on
(for skills) and obliquely (behavior traits, values/attitudes) to
see if the person has the passion to highly perform in the job,
even if demonstrating good skills and aptitude.
B. Environment
[0097] The embodiment described herein is used to either evaluate
potential employees for a position in a company, to evaluate a
current employee in a position within a company, or to evaluate a
job or position in a company so that a more effective strategy of
obtaining correct employees or more correctly planning the future
of a company can be accomplished.
[0098] The described embodiment utilizes what is called in the art
a "competency model". Such competency models have been widely
discussed in the literature. For example, see Boyatzi, Richard,
"The Competency Manager: A Mode For Effective Performance", John
Wiley & Sons (1982); and Spenser and Spenser, "Competence At
Work", John Wiley & Sons (1993). As discussed previously
herein, existing competency models do not agree with one another;
and more importantly, focus on deriving competencies, no matter how
defined, of a potential or existing employee.
[0099] The present invention starts with a definition of
competencies that is based upon behaviors and values such as are
defined in the co-owned, issued U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880. Thus, the
competencies are founded in the soft skills or more intangible
aspects of a person's inherent make-up, as opposed to education,
work experience, or technical ("hard") skills. Secondly, the
methodology is based on first characterizing the job or position,
as opposed to the person being evaluated for the job.
[0100] The invention can be useful in a number of ways. It will be
first described with regard to evaluation of potential employees
for a job.
C. Definitions
[0101] Some definitions will assist in an understanding of this
description:
[0102] "Position" means a job in a given organization.
[0103] "Position Survey" means an initial questionnaire given to
persons familiar with a position to derive competencies deemed
required for superior performance in such a position.
[0104] "Position Report" means a description of required
competencies for superior performance for a position based on the
Position Survey (s), and can include discussion of approaches for
identifying prospects for the position and interviewing such
prospects.
[0105] "Personal Competency Inventory" means a survey intended for
a potential employee for the purpose of evaluating the potential
employee's competencies related to the position.
[0106] "Feedback Survey" means a survey intended for any or all of
an existing employee, an employee's superior(s), that employees
peer(s), that employee's subordinate(s), or others having some
relationship with the position.
[0107] "Feedback Report" means a description of the results from
one or more "Feedback Surveys".
[0108] "Interview Record" means a form useful for an interviewer
relative to an interviewee.
[0109] "Interview Candidate Comparison," means a form for an
interviewer to help compare a plurality of interview
candidates.
[0110] "Competency", as used herein, means a behaviorally-related
observable characteristic in the workplace relative to a particular
job from the Set of Competencies defined herein.
[0111] "Set of Competencies", as used herein, means a specific
family of Competencies.
D. Apparatus
[0112] FIG. 1 illustrates a basic apparatus for using the system 10
according to the invention. A computer 12 would include software 14
and text files 16 stored in a database. Computer 12 is capable of
processing multiple Position Surveys 20, Personal Competency
Inventories 22, and Feedback Surveys 24. Each of surveys 20, 22,
and 24 can be in electronic form, accessible to a potential
employee at a computer terminal, either near computer 12, or at a
remote cite. A communications network 16 (modem, Worldwide Web,
Intranet, etc.) can be used to communicate electronic versions of
these surveys.
[0113] Computer 12 processes the surveys according software 14 and
can produce several types of output reports.
[0114] A computer can be used to more efficiently process
information according to the invention. Appropriate hardware is
within the skill of those skilled in the art.
[0115] U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880 discloses ways in which the system
of the present invention could be practiced, including its
computerization and the use of questionnaires, the coding .and
numerical characterization of the codings, and thus the ability to
process the information with a computer, and provide an output
report.
[0116] Software can be developed, as within the skill of those
skilled in the art, by following this description.
[0117] As illustrated in FIG. 1, a Position Report 30 is possible,
based on Position Survey 20. A Personal Competency Inventory report
32 can be produced based on Personal Competency Inventory 22. A
Feedback Report 34 could be produced based on Feedback Survey 24.
These are each described in more detail later.
[0118] Additional reports could be created such as a comparison of
Position Survey 20 with Personal Competency Inventory 22 (see
reference numeral 36). Similarly, comparison of Personal Competency
Inventory 22 (see reference numeral 36). Similarly, comparison of
Position Survey 20 with Feedback Survey 24 could be produced (see
reference numeral 38). Still further, other types of reports can be
created as will be appreciated.
[0119] A communication network 18 can also be used to
electronically transmit such reports to a desired location. For
example, e-mail, modem, Worldwide Web, Intranet, etc. could be used
to electronically communicate any of the reports to a remote site
for display on a computer or printing of a hardcopy.
[0120] Subject matter experts could take Position Survey 20 at a
personal computer and submit to an employment agency in city A.
Computer 12 could be located in city B. A potential employer could
be located in city C. The potential employees, taking a Personal
Competency Inventory 22 in city A could have it transmitted to
computer 12 in city B. Computer 12 could issue a report and send it
electronically to city C for use by employer, comparing potential
employee to the Position Report.
E. Methodology
[0121] Behind the surveys and reports created to define the
Competencies related to superior performance in a job the
identification, definition and selection of a family of
Competencies referred to herein as the Set of Competencies. As
previously discussed, much has been written about "competencies".
However, no agreement exists as to what is a competency.
[0122] A standardized set, the Set of Competencies, is established.
The Set of Competencies have also been derived from studies of
foundational work on competency, and on foundational work relating
to behaviors and values/attitudes. This is described in U.S. Pat.
No. 5,551,880.
[0123] Presently there are all sorts of definitions of what
comprises a "competency" related to jobs or performance. As used
herein, the Set of Competencies is selected as being almost
universally relevant to most jobs or positions in the workplace. By
relevant it is meant that across the universe of potential jobs and
positions, these are usually possibly relevant, either as being
very important to a job, somewhat important, or not important. It
is to be understood that sometimes determining what is not
important for good performance in a job, can be very valuable to
accurately defining the job.
[0124] As can be appreciated, the Set of Competencies does not
directly relate to resumes, education, technical experience, or
prior job experience. They are "soft skills", or in other words,
"demonstrable, observable behaviors".
[0125] (1) Set of Competencies
[0126] "Set of Competencies", for purposed herein, means the
following Competencies with the following meanings: [0127] 1.
Leadership/Management: Achieving goals and objectives through
others. [0128] 2. Employee Development/Coaching: Facilitating and
supporting the professional growth of others. [0129] 3. Team Work:
Working effectively and productively with others. [0130] 4.
Conflict Management: Addressing and resulting conflict
constructively. [0131] 5. Inter-Personal Skills: Effectively
communicating, building rapport and relating well to all kinds of
people. [0132] 6. Problem Solving/Decision Making: Anticipating,
analyzing, diagnosing and resolving problems. [0133] 7.
Creativity/Innovation: Adapting traditional or devising new
approaches, concepts, methods, models, designs, processes,
technologies and systems. [0134] 8. Written Communication: Writing
clearly, succinctly and understandably. [0135] 9. Customer Service:
Anticipating, meeting or exceeding customer needs, wants and
expectations. [0136] 10. Flexibility: Agility in adapting to
change. [0137] 11. Goal Orientation: Energetically focusing efforts
on meeting a goal, mission or objective. [0138] 12.
Planning/Organizing: Utilizing logical, systematic and orderly
procedures to meet objectives. [0139] 13. Diplomacy: Effectively
handling difficult or sensitive issues by utilizing tact, diplomacy
and an understanding of organizational culture, climate and/or
politics. [0140] 14. Personal Effectiveness: Demonstrating
initiative, self-confidence, resiliency and a willingness to take
responsibility for personal actions. [0141] 15. Presenting:
Communicating effectively to groups. [0142] 16. Negotiation:
Facilitating agreements between two or more parties. [0143] 17.
Persuasion: Convincing others to change the way they think, believe
or behave. [0144] 18. Empathy: Identifying with and caring about
others. [0145] 19. Continuous Learning: Taking initiative in
learning and implementing new concepts, technologies and/or
methods. [0146] 20. Futuristic Thinking: Imagining, envisioning,
projecting and/or predicting what has not yet been realized. [0147]
21. Decision Making: Utilizing effective processes to make
decisions. [0148] 22. Self Management: Demonstrating self-control
and an ability to manage time and priorities. [0149] 23.
Management: Achieving extraordinary results through effective
manage of resources, systems, and processes. Therefore, the Set of
Competencies, here twenty-three of them, are specifically defined.
As can be seen, each have a directly behaviorally- or
attitude-related aspect.
[0150] The Set of Competencies is used in the system of surveys and
reports to assist in defining the behaviorally and attitude related
characteristics of a wide variety of jobs as follows.
[0151] (2) Position Survey
[0152] To provide a standardized system for first defining
behaviorally-related Competencies for most jobs, a standardized
Position Survey 20 is created. An example is shown at FIG. 3. It is
constructed as follows.
[0153] An introductory page (FIG. 3B) is for administrative use,
for example, calling for a job code, company name, title of the
position, and nature of position. It also calls for information
about the respondent, the person filling out the Position Survey,
including identification of Respondent and a code. Coding of the
position and the Respondent helps facilitate computer processing
and tracking.
[0154] Instructions, both at an introductory page (FIG. 3C) and
continued throughout the Position Survey, key the Respondent to
answer based not on how they think they perform in the position, or
how they would like to perform, or even how they think they or
others should perform; but rather on what the position requires for
superior performance.
[0155] Some non-behaviorally-related factors can be elicited in a
first section (FIGS. 3D-E) of questions which surveys the type of
authority, responsibility, accountability, consequences, and risks
associated with the position. This information can be very helpful
in evaluating or defining a position.
[0156] A second section (FIGS. 3F-L) is directed towards behavioral
requirements for the position. The questions are specifically
constructed to elicit from a Respondent the type of observable
behavior(s) that are deemed important in the position, and more
specifically, the questions are specifically constructed to elicit
the type of Competencies, from the Set of Competencies, the
Respondent feels are required for superior performance in such a
position.
[0157] A third section (FIGS. 3M-3U) is directed at situational
events for the position, but is specifically constructed to also
elicit information from the Respondent about Competencies, from the
Set of Competencies, required for superiors performance in such a
position.
[0158] The way in which the Competencies are elicited from the
survey is as follows. At least some of the queries of Sections 2
and 3 of the Position Survey 20 of FIG. 3 are pre-coded. This is
indicated by the handwritten letter/number combination to the right
of some of the answers to the questions of Sections 2 and 3 of
Position Survey 20 (FIGS. 3F-U). The hand-written letter/number
combination(s) do not appear on Position Surveys given to
Respondents. The correlation of those codings are stored in
computer 12, so that computer 12 knows which questions of Position
Report 20 are related to which Competencies. Therefore, the answer
given by a respondent to any such question implicates such
Competency (ies).
[0159] Position Survey 20 is preferably given to one or more
persons that clearly understand the position at issue. Preferably,
these persons are selected who are themselves high performers or
perform at a superior level in the position.
[0160] FIG. 3 sets forth one such example of Position Survey 20.
This is one example only and is by no way a limitation on what a
Position Survey could contain or its format or content.
[0161] As also indicated by hand-written letters relative to
certain questions in the Position Survey, the Position Survey can
use the methodology of U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880 to simultaneously
probe the Respondent for behavior and value characteristics
relative to the job. Hand-written letters to the left and below
certain questions (D, I, S, or C) are the same as disclosed in U.S.
Pat. No. 5,551,880 and reference can be taken to that patent for
ways in which such can be processed. Computer 12 knows which
questions from the Position Survey relate to which
behaviorally-related factors from the methodology of U.S. Pat. No.
5,551,880.
[0162] Likewise, the handwritten letters (Identified with T, U, A,
S, I, Tr), the attitude being measured, to the right and below
certain questions in FIG. 3 sections 2 and 3 are the same or
similar to the values coding set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880.
Computer 12 would be programmed accordingly.
[0163] Thus, Position Survey 20 is pre-designed to present a
Respondent with queries, some of which directly relate to the Set
of Competencies.
[0164] A Respondent goes through the Position Survey, and if he/she
follows the directions, will answer the queries accordingly. The
answers can be electronically recorded. However, it could be
manually filled out.
[0165] (3) Processing the PS
[0166] The responses to Position Survey 20 are processed as
follows.
[0167] The questions in the first section (FIGS. 3D-3E) are also
pre-coded in computer 12 (shown by hand-written letter/number
combinations (to the right of certain queries). FIG. 4A shows the
scoring key for the first section. If a Respondent places a check
in the blank next, to a query that has B1, that element is rated by
computer 12 as being "slight", that is, slightly relevant to the
position. A check for a query coded BS would be rated "major", of
major relevancy to the position.
[0168] Similarly, codings P1 to P5 and A1-A5 are handled in a
similar way. Queries coded to B1-B5 relate to the job element
accounts for results. Queries coded P1-P5 are related to the job
element results through people. Queries coded A1-A5 are related to
the job element authority.
[0169] As shown in FIG. 4B, the answers of the Respondent to
section 1 of the Position Survey can be combined into a rating for
each of the job elements "Responsibility for Results",
"Responsibility for Result Thorough People", "Authority", and
"Organizational Risks". These ratings can complement Competency
and/or behavior/values ratings in defining the job and assist in
the selection process and performance management.
[0170] The second and third sections of a Position Survey of FIG. 3
are evaluated and processed as follows. First, the questions from
those sections relate to each of 23 competencies from the Set of
Competencies. This is indicated by the hand-written numbers placed
to the left side underneath the questions of Sections 2 and 3.
These numbers reflect the competency or competencies being
evaluated by each questionnaire to the numbers in the list of the
Set of Competencies previously given. Again, the hand-written
numbers placed near the questions of sections 2 and 3 of the
Position Survey of FIG. 3 are to allow an understanding of how
different ones of the questions are coded relative to different
Competencies. The hand-written numbers would not appear on the
Position Survey, but would be stored in computer 12 and correlated
to the relevant questions.
[0171] Each taker of Position Survey 20 will answer all the
questions related to each of the 23 of the Set of Competencies.
FIG. 5A illustrates an example of the distribution of the nine
questions per each of the 23 Competencies throughout sections 2 and
3 of the Position Survey.
[0172] The Respondent would answer each of the questions of
sections 2 and 3 by indicating a value between 1 and 5 (see FIGS.
3F to 3U). Depending on those answers, each of the 23 of the Set of
Competencies will be ranked by the survey taker between a ranking
of "essential" to "not necessary" in Section 2, in between a
ranking of "extensive" to "very little" in Section 3. Points are
assigned to each answer. For example, if the answer to question 1
is given as "essential", having a numerical value of "one" in
Position Survey 20, a coding numerical value of "six" is given
meaning that it has been given the most importance. If a "two" is
circled, it is given a point rating of "five" and so on, so that if
a "six" rating is circled, the numerical value is "one".
[0173] The most points available for a given competency would be 54
(nine questions times six possible points). The least value would
be 9 (nine questions times one).
[0174] In this manner, software 14 of computer 12 can calculate
which of the 23 competencies is ranked between "very important" and
"not important" by the survey taker in the following manner.
[0175] If a Competency receives a score greater than 83% of the
maximum score of 54 (that is, a score of 45 or more) is then ranked
as "very important" for the job. Any Competency receiving a score
of between 51% and 82% of possible 54 points (that is, a score of
between 28 and 45) is rated as "important" for the job.
Competencies scoring 50% or under of maximum possible score (under
28 points) are ranked as "not important" for the job.
[0176] It is also to be understood that many of the questions in
Position Survey 20 are intentionally derived from behaviors or
values/attitudes as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880.
Hand-written codes are set forth in FIG. 3, Sections 2 and 3,
indicating correspondence of certain questions to behaviors and
values (see FIG. 5B for summary of how behavior and values codings
are distributed between sections 2 and 3 of the Position Survey of
FIG. 3). Letters to the left below questions and Sections 2 and 3
indicate relationship to values coding (T, U, A, S, I, Tr)
according to the 5,551,880 patent. Letters to the right below
questions and Sections 2 and 3 of FIG. 3 relate to values coding
from 5,551,880 patent. Thus, an interface between questions of
Position Survey 20, and the Set of Competencies, and the
behavior/values of the 5,551,880 patent are utilized. By this
combination, we can determine if the competency comes from nurture
or nature.
[0177] Reference can be taken to U.S. Pat. No. 5,551,880 regarding
how questions are coded, processed, and scored relative to
behaviors and values.
[0178] Thus, a set of Respondents (one or more, preferably one to
ten) who have knowledge about the position (preferably are high
performers) take the Position Survey and define the job by the
correlation of queries in the Position Survey to the 23
Competencies of the Set of Competencies.
[0179] (5) Position Reports
[0180] FIGS. 6-10 illustrate Position Reports 30. FIG. 6 will be
called a Master Position Report because it contains basically a
complete listing of all the possible text files that could be
utilized for each of the 23 of the Set of Competencies. It also
shows the basic format for Position 30 Report 30.
[0181] The Position Report is created by computer 12 from the
results it processes from the Position Survey. Computer 12 can
process a Position Survey from one Respondent or integrate Position
Surveys from a plurality of Respondents.
[0182] A description page (e.g. FIG. 6B) explains the Position
Report.
[0183] Then, a hierarchy of competencies is set forth (FIG. 6C).
This is simply based on which of the 23 of the Set of Competencies
receives enough points to fit into the "very important" class,
"important" class, or "not important" class. The viewer of Position
Report 30 can then quickly see which competencies are deemed very
important, important, or not important for the job.
[0184] Secondly, Position Report 30 can include a section called
"Distribution of Competency Rankings" (FIG. 6E). Each respondent to
Position Survey 20 would have a ranking in order of importance of
the 23 competencies, which would be shown in this distribution.
Discrepancies between different respondents could then be
evaluated. It could point out certain competencies are indeed less
important relative to others. It could also show a discrepancy that
would assist in understanding of the position or create questions
that could be evaluated to see if there is a reason for any
inconsistencies.
[0185] Third, the report can contain "key characteristics of the
position" (See FIG. 6F). This is related most directly to Section 1
of Position Survey 20, as previously explained with respect to FIG.
4B.
[0186] Thereafter, text files from text file 16 are available to
construct a "Summary of Top Competencies" (FIGS. 6G to 6M). In FIG.
6, all text files for all of the 23 Competencies are set forth to
show the different summaries for each Competency. In an actual
Position Report, only a few of the Competencies would normally be
reported. It is believed that five to seven of the highest ranked
competencies is all that is required to give a good
characterization of the position.
[0187] Finally, FIGS. 60-6AB show the set of text files that are
available to create behavioral interview questions. Such questions
would give an interviewer the type of questions needed to find out
or verify whether a job applicant fits the Competency model of the
position defined by the Position Survey.
[0188] FIGS. 7, 8, 9, and 10 are hypothetical Position Reports 30
for four different jobs; namely, an automobile salesperson (FIG.
7), a vice president of marketing (FIG. 8), a computer programmer
(FIG. 9), and a customer service representative (FIG. 10). As can
be seen in comparing FIG. 7-10, the hierarchy of competencies
varies for each. For example, the automobile salesperson report 30
has only one "very important" competency common namely customer
service. However, looking at the distribution of competency
rankings, the two respondents to Position Survey 20 actually had
four competencies ranked as "very important". This was interpreted
as meaning that only customer service was truly "very important",
because the competencies of "persuasion", "interpersonal skills",
and "goal orientation" were never ranked at level 1 by either
respondent. The summary of competencies reprinted text files
regarding the top seven ranked competencies by the respondents.
[0189] In comparison, FIG. 8 had 19 "very important" competencies.
However, again, only the top seven were summarized.
[0190] FIG. 9 also had one "very important" competency whereas FIG.
10 has three.
[0191] Note also that Position Report 30 can contain other
information. As shown in FIGS. 8-10, work environment (behavioral
related characteristics for the position) can be summarized as can
attitude or values related characteristics.
[0192] In addition, specific interview questions can be generated
from text files 16 relative to each of the competencies determined
to be most important for the position.
[0193] It can therefore be seen that the Position Survey, probing
respondents for behaviors and values related competencies from the
selected Set of Competencies, allows a definition of the job to be
created in a Position Report 30. The job thus quantified, is
defined in terms of the type, the inherent behaviors of the person,
and the attitudes or values of the person, that would provide
superior performance for the job. This is different from evaluating
a resume, or evaluating a person based just on interview. It is
deriving a description of the job itself by listening to the
behavioral and values traits that are articulated in the answers to
the Position Survey by persons who do perform well in the job.
[0194] Once the most important competencies are identified for the
job, a strategy for finding the correct and best candidates for the
job can be created. Behavioral and attitude characteristics are
summarized and listed in the Position Report. Interview questions
are even created.
[0195] FIG. 2 summarizes by flowchart for the previously described
process. The actual position is first identified (50). Preferably,
one to ten persons who clearly understand the position are selected
to take Position Survey 20 (52).
[0196] If Position Survey 20 is available in hardcopy or a form
that can be directly displayed to the respondents (54), the
appropriate Position Survey 20 is selected (56), printed (possibly
from an Internet site) (58), copies are made for the appropriate
number of persons (60) and an orientation session is held (62).
[0197] Selected persons take the questionnaire (64, 66, and 68) and
a "Position Folder" is created (70) to hold the questionnaires.
[0198] The responses of the respondents can be keyed into a
computer (72) or stored on a storage medium such as a diskette. The
responses in electronic form could be sent via Internet (74) or
mailed (76) for processing.
[0199] Alternatively, the respondents could be given electronic
versions of Position Survey 20 on diskette. They could
electronically complete the survey, the diskettes could be
collected, and either electronically or physically sent for
processing by computer 12.
[0200] (6) Optional Debriefing
[0201] FIG. 11 illustrates how Position Report 30 can be handled.
The entity interested in the Position Report 30 (for example the
company) would receive report 30 (90) and review the report (92).
If there is no disparity on respondents' rankings or if any
disparity is not of concern (94) the end user or customer can use
the report for job description (120), future planning (122) or
interviewing (112).
[0202] Note, however, that it is contemplated that a customer may
want to meet with respondents to Position Survey 20 after it has
been completed (96), review the definitions of competencies (98)
and get an agreement on the most important competencies for the
position (100) before using Position Report 30 further.
[0203] As shown in FIG. 11, Position Report 30 could even be used
to change the job description (114, 116, 118, 130). Still further,
it can be used to weigh competencies (106) as will be described
later.
[0204] If a disparity in rankings is of concern, a meeting with
respondents can take place (124) and the process repeated (126) to
try to get better consensus (128).
F. Alternatives, Features, Options
[0205] The included preferred embodiment is given by way of example
only, and not by way of limitation to the invention, which is
solely described by the claims herein. Variations obvious to one
skilled in the art will be including within the invention defined
by the claims.
[0206] For example, surveys regarding other competencies or hard
skills could be added to Position Survey 20 and Position Report 30.
This could also assist an interviewer, or help define a job.
[0207] Additionally, as stated previously, live discussion or
debriefing of a Position Report with respondents or other parties
could be conducted to fine-tune or alter a description of the job.
It is not required.
[0208] Still further, after obtaining a definition of a job through
use of a Position Survey, and then producing a Position Report,
other actions related thereto could be taken, such as are discussed
below.
[0209] (1) Personal Competency Inventory (PCI)
[0210] FIG. 12 sets forth a hypothetical Personal Competency
Inventory. Such an inventory is focused upon gaining information
from a potential employee.
[0211] A first section (FIG. 12 B) asks the person to characterize
how he/she thinks others would describe his/her behaviors.
[0212] Second 2, FIGS. 12C-12H, probe the person's feelings or
beliefs about different job related situations, while section 3
(FIGS. 12G-12K) directly probe the person's career accomplishments
related to our competency model.
[0213] As shown in handwriting to the right of the questions in
sections 2 and 3 of the PCI of FIG. 12, the relationship of certain
questions to certain competencies from the Set of Competencies is
set forth. The alphanumeric pair coded next to question in Personal
Competency Inventory 22 are pre-correlated to the twenty-three
Competencies from the Set of Competencies, i.e. P20 relates to the
twentieth listed Competency in the Set of Competencies listed
earlier.
[0214] FIG. 13 illustrates the number of questions from PCI
sections 2 and 3 that relate to which Competencies of the Set of
Competencies. The PCI is utilized to try to gauge a potential
employee's characterization of his or her own competencies (related
to the Set of Competencies).
[0215] (2) Personal Competency Inventory Report
[0216] FIG. 14 illustrates the results of an evaluation of Personal
Competency Inventory 22 of FIG. 12. The self-perceived competencies
of the potential employee are ranked in order based on how the
person answered the questions of sections 2 and 3 of the PCI.
[0217] From the Personal Competency Inventory Report 32, an
employer can compare the same with a Position Report 30. The
employer can select candidates for the position based on the
highest correlation between report 30 and report 32. Report 30, if
it includes interview questions, can then be used advantageously by
the employer to further probe whether the selected candidates fit
the competency requirements of Position Report 30.
[0218] Therefore, by utilizing both reports 30 and 32, an employer
is given the tools to evaluate perspective employees based on the
Set of Competencies related to behavior and values and the
competencies deemed by incumbents in the position that perform at a
high level, to be the most important such competencies.
[0219] (3) Feedback Survey
[0220] It can also be advantageous for a company to track the
performance of an employee. System 10 allows this as follows.
Periodically, an employee functioning in a position, as well as
others such as a superior, one or more subordinates, or one or more
peers, can take a Feedback Survey such as shown in FIGS. 15-17. The
competencies previously described are used to evaluate present
employees using the Feedback Survey.
[0221] (4) Feedback Report
[0222] The answers to Feedback Reports 24 of FIGS. 15-17 can then
be compiled in a Feedback Report 34 such as shown in FIGS. 18 and
19. The views of others regarding the employee, as well as the
employee's own use, are then quantified. Variations in those
results can then be compared. This can be very helpful in assisting
the employee develop the competencies most important for the job.
It can also be used to determine whether a certain employee is not
the correct fit for a job.
[0223] (6) Interview Candidate Record
[0224] FIGS. 20-22 illustrate forms that can be used by an
interviewer while interviewing several different candidates for a
position. FIGS. 20 and 21 are hypothetical examples for two
different candidates for the same job. The top five competencies
from the Position Report 30 are set forth in the Interview
Candidate Record. Weighting of the importance of the competency to
other competencies is set forth, as well as a ranking from the
personal competency index taken by the employee.
[0225] A weighting result is achieved by multiplying the two.
Summation of those products gives a total score for the candidate.
The form also allows the interviewer to write notes regarding the
rating for future reference. Finally, FIG. 23 illustrates a
comparison chart of the top five competencies for each of the
candidates to assist in a selection process for the position.
* * * * *