Assessing Talent

Program is founded on accredited training, practical experience and deep research into the benefits and limitations of various assessment methods and approaches that may be used to select candidates for employment, promotion or further development.

Assessment methods and approaches – what are the methods/approaches and when can they be used most effectively.

Interviews (structured/unstructured formats; use of behavioural, situational and motivational interviewing techniques); psychometric evaluation (cognitive ability and personality); situational judgment assessments; skills and knowledge tests; work samples and simulations; analysis & presentation exercises; role plays; leaderless group discussions; in-tray exercises; etc.

The role of assessors in selection panels or at assessment centres.  How they can consistently and reliably assess the capabilities of candidates.

Effectiveness of assessment methods in predicting on-the-job performance – results of meta-analysis and alternative viewpoints.

Unconscious biases and other influences in candidate assessment.  Confidence v competence. Extraversion v introversion.

Developing Employee Capabilities

ToDo

Managing Unsatisfactory Performance

This program equips participants with the strategies, techniques and tools to fairly and effectively manage unsatisfactory performance. At the end of the program, participants will be able to:

Ø  Develop and implement effective performance improvement strategies

Ø  Help to build a culture of performance and accountability in their teams.

The program is grounded in practical experience in public sector environments and is informed by extensive research into employment law and the decisions of industrial tribunals in performance management cases. The program incorporates a mix of strategic and tactical approaches to resolving unsatisfactory performance and addresses the following aspects:

Ø  Avoiding common pitfalls in dealing with unsatisfactory performance

Ø  Setting defensible performance standards

Ø  Developing case management strategies that take account of possible causes of unsatisfactory performance (including health issues)

Ø  Focus on results and/or behaviours, not personality

Ø  Debunking myths about bullying and performance management by reference to industrial case law

Ø  Managing interactions with employees and their representatives in face-to-face meetings and in written communications

  • Ensuring procedural fairness throughout the performance management process, including seeking employee input, providing reasonable improvement opportunities and supporting the employee.

  • Knowing the limits of reasonable support.

Ø  Factors to be considered when deciding on action to be taken if performance continues to be unsatisfactory.

Ø  Considering employee response before implementing any final decision.

Ø  Responding to and resolving possible claims of unfair dismissal.

Ø  Examining  best  practice procedures  in  managing unsatisfactory performance

Ø  Setting and assessing reasonable performance standards

Ø  Developing, implementing and monitoring performance improvement strategies

Ø  Ensuring procedural fairness when taking action to resolve unsatisfactory performance.

Managing Workplace Change

Program is based on extensive experience in implementing change in public sector organisations, including transformational change in unionised environments.

Scale of change – major/transformation, minor/increment, staff losses?

Considerations before deciding on change that is likely to be resisted strenuously (Is it the right thing to do, is it worth the effort/fight, what is the likelihood of success).

Using employee consultation to test the practicality of proposed changes, identify obstacles and/or determine the best implementation strategies.

Consider need for business process re-engineering in preparation for change, e.g. new information or management systems (rather than design system around current, inefficient processes).

Advantages of various change management models, including Lewin, ADKAR, Kotter, McKinsey, Maurer and Deming models.

Developing change acceptance/tolerance in organisations by building trust between management and employees (using direct, open & honest communication and honouring commitments).

Communication and training plans to support changes to structure, staffing, systems and/or processes.

Investigating Misconduct

Understanding key concepts and processes, including definition of ‘misconduct’, ‘procedural fairness’, ‘standard of proof’, ‘summary dismissal’, etc.

Deciding who should investigate allegations of misconduct and who will decide on any action to be taken in response to the investigation’s findings and conclusions.  Also consider who can authorize access to sensitive records (e.g. email and internet use) and the possible suspension of employees under investigation.

Investigator needs to plan and manage the investigation in a fair and effective manner. What information to gather/record, who to talk to and when to do perform each step in the process.

Potential sources of evidence: Witness statements, documents and other records, independent expert evidence (e.g. doctors), etc.  Hearsay evidence.  Keeping an open mind about alleged conduct and looking for evidence that supports and/or refutes allegations.

Interview techniques such as the PEACE model of interviewing: Avoiding leading questions or influencing evidence.

Evaluating evidence and reaching reasonable conclusions: Applying the civil standard of proof (balance of probabilities) to any findings. Strength of evidence must be commensurate with the seriousness of alleged misconduct and possible disciplinary action.

Disability and misconduct – distinguishing between them in determining outcome.

Reporting the findings and conclusions of investigation.

Management action in response to investigation report:

Factors to be considered in deciding on action if misconduct is found to have occurred. (Punishment must fit the crime, strength of required evidence depends on seriousness of penalty, take account of mitigating factors, e.g. admission/cooperation, consider all options, etc)

Communicating the investigation outcome and any proposed management action to the employee, who is the subject of the allegations.

Considering the employee’s response before making a final decision regarding management action.

Responding to and resolving possible claims of unfair dismissal.

(Check CBC3 on Toshiba device for reference material)

 

 

·         Informal process (Expectations Meeting);

 

·         Formal process (Investigation).

 

 

Case study:

 

·         Analyse scenario – Who, what, where, when and why?

 

·         Develop an investigation plan.