pap final - phillip hash

CLERICAL FOCUSED SELECTION BATTERY FOR A PROGRAM ASSOCIATE II 1

Phillip Hash

University of Baltimore

APPL 645 – PAP Project

Clerical Focused Selection Battery for a Program Associate II

Dr. Thomas Mitchell


Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to provide management with a viable selection procedure for the

position of Program Associate II that will ensure that the best applicants are hired. The selection tools

recommended are the Employee Aptitude Survey (EAS) and the PSI Basic Skills Test (BST). Subtests

within each tool will be used as predictors to focus on when selecting candidates to fill the position of

Program Associate II including Verbal Reasoning, Visual Speed and Accuracy, Numerical Ability,

Following Oral Directions, Following Written Directions, and Forms Checking. A review of these selection

tools along with the six subtests within the selection tools were reviewed using a criterion-related

validity study to assess how well each subtest predicted job performance in clerical jobs. An interview

protocol was also provided to management as a supplement to the selection tool. The interview will also

serve as a predictor. A performance appraisal method that can be used for administrative and/or

development purposes will also be provided to management.


Introduction

Valid, evidence based selection procedures are essential in efficient hiring practices. If poor

hiring choices are made, it can cost the organization significant amounts of money in training, recruiting

for another candidates, compensation for the unqualified hired employee while they are employed, etc.

Poor selection procedures can also lead to legal problems with the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC). In order to know the knowledge, skills, and abilities of a qualified candidate, a job

analysis must be completed. A job analysis is needed to gain enough understanding of the job to know

how the job is performed effectively and what applicant characteristics are needed to do so (Guion &

Highhouse, 2006). After an understanding of the minimum qualifications, roles, responsibilities, and

duties of this position are gained, a selection procedure can be utilized to help ensure qualified

candidates are selected for employment. Within the chosen selection tools, six predictors will be

highlighted using sound methodology. A validity study is highly recommended for selection procedures

according to the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (EEOC, 1978). In this case, a

criterion-related validity study was reviewed to show that the predictors in the selection tools are valid

predictors of a vital criterion, job performance. The selection tools that will be used to best select the

position of Program Associate II, will be the Employment Aptitude Survey (EAS) and the PSI Basic Skills

Test (BST). The selection tools focus on general cognitive ability (GCA). Subtests within each selection

tool will allow examinees to demonstrate fluid intelligence, the ability to solve new problems through

reasoning, and crystallized intelligence, relying on prior knowledge and experience to solve problems

(Spearman, C., 1904). Schmidt and Hunter (1998) offered a .51 validity coefficient between GCA and job

performance.

Three subtests within each selection tool will serve as the predictors, as well as a structured

interview. The six subtests are Verbal Reasoning, Visual Speed and Accuracy, Numerical Ability (EAS),


Following Oral Directions, Following Written Directions, and Forms Checking (BST). The job family that

this position is most closely related to is Clerical. Thus, a criterion-related validity study will be focused

on the proposed selection tools and jobs within the Clerical family, according to previous studies

conducted on the proposed selection tools. Pearlman, Schmidt, & Hunter (1980) found that in most

cases, validity can be generalized to similar clerical jobs and that it was justified.

If the selection procedure is used effectively and the six predictors are focused on, plus the

structured interview, management will save money by hiring qualified candidates and by reducing the

amount of candidates to interview which will also save time. Proper use of the selection battery will also

reduce turnover, engage employees, and increase productivity. According to the roles, responsibilities

and duties of this position, being able to read reports effectively, quickly and efficiently create binders

and reports, and ability to comprehend numerical involved issues such as reimbursement claims are all

effective skills required to effectively perform this job. Focusing on the six subtests within the EAS and

BST will allow management to select the best candidate.

The EAS and BST has been professionally reviewed for test use, validation and legal guidelines in

the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection (Ruch, et al., 1994; Ruch, et al., 2001). If set up properly,

adverse impact can be proactively avoided as much as possible. All candidates will be considered for this

position and selection procedure regardless of their race, sex, national origin, sexual preference, or age.

This will aid avoiding any legal challenges during selection.

A performance appraisal method, in which rating scales will be utilized, will also be provided so

that management can effectively assess each Program Associate II according to specific outcomes

highlighted by supervisors and management.

Methodology


The developed job description was created by viewing older job descriptions as well as

interviewing one incumbent of the job. From those two means of information, a collection of minimum

qualifications, roles, responsibilities, and duties were developed. From there, the focus became, what

are the essential attributes and possible predictors of job performance in this position? The interviewee

indicated that frequent and essential job duties included, “Compile and use program budgets,” “Produce

workshop binder, handouts, and evaluations,” “Coordinate all binder production and assembly for all

types of meetings,” “Translation – English/Spanish,” and “Travel, hotel and car rental coordination

including initial contact, options provision, confirmation of contact information, booking, forwarding of

reservation confirmations, and any questions for all Program, Management and Board meetings for

CEO.” From this information, six predictors were selected. Being able to accurately visually scan the

contents of a document or a binder for program materials is a key component of this position. Two

other vital attributes to have in this position is following oral and written directions. This position is very

close to the Senior Vice President (SVP) of the organization. Thus, effectively following directions from

the SVP is essential. The selection tools chosen to best encompass these six predictors was the

Employee Aptitude Survey (EAS) (Rush, et al., 1994) and the PSI Basic Skills Test (BST) (Ruch, et al.,

2001).

The EAS is a test battery that is easy to administer and scannable test forms for machine scoring

are available for all eight subtests within the selection tool (Rush, et al., 1994). As mentioned before, the

three subtests of Verbal Reasoning, Visual Speed and Accuracy, and Numerical Ability. Group testing is

preferred from a cost standpoint and no special training is needed to administer the test. This test

overall is cheaper than most personality assessments. Administers should be somewhat savvy in

respects to understanding percentiles and means, as norm tables are available to assist in score

interpretation (Ruch, et al., 1994). Individual results of the test should be compared to the Clerical Job

Family norm tables as well as to other individuals that are being tested for the position. Guilford and


Fruchter (1978) recommend that to maximize validity, keep the time limits short. The three subtests

within this tool have specific descriptions.

In the Verbal Reasoning subtest, a series of facts are presented to the candidate and five

conclusions are presented to them after each series of facts. Candidates are to select whether or not the

conclusion is true, false, or uncertain. Scoring is the number of right answers minus ½ the wrong

answers. In the Visual Speed and Accuracy subtest, the candidates’ ability to see details quickly and

accurately is assessed. There are 150 items consisting of pairs of number series are presented to the

candidate, in which they have five minutes to review as many pairs as possible and to indicate if each

pair is the same or different. In the subtest of numerical ability, the ability to add, subtract, multiply, and

divide whole numbers, decimals, and fractions are assessed. They will be given four numerical options as

well as an option of “X” indicating that the correct answer is not given. They have a total of ten minutes

across three parts (Ruch, et al., 1994).

The BST have subtests that are brief and easy to administer with most subtests having 5-minute

time limits. Web formats and computer scoring is available and norms based on thousands of clerical

employee results are also available to assist in interpreting test scores. The dimensions within this test

have identified vital skills and abilities important for clerical jobs and successful job performance have

been measured using a nationwide task analysis. According to research, it has been concluded that the

BST is not unfair to minorities. (Ruch, et al., 2001). The three subtests within this tool have specific

descriptions.

In the Following Oral Directions subtest, an examinee is to listen to a 6.5 minute recording of a

typical conversation one would expect to hear in an employment setting. Questions are then presented

to examinees based on the information in the recording and are to select the correct answer from five

alternatives. Note taking is allowed and there are 24 items with a time limit of 5 minutes. In the


Following Written Directions subtest, an examinee is presented with a set of rules and then are to

determine what action to take when presented with various situations involving the set of rules.

Examinees are to select the correct answer from three or four alternatives and have 5 minutes to

complete a possible 36 items. Finally, in the Forms Checking subtest, examinees are to read a paragraph.

Then, are presented with a corresponding form and asked if it has been completed correctly on the basis

of information presented in the paragraph. There are 42 items in this subtest and examinees have 5

minutes to complete as many as possible (Ruch, et al., 2001).

Each candidate that scores in the top 3 of a composite six subtest results, will be brought in for

an interview with management. The top 3 was selected because the position being sought to fill typically

only requires one employee. To avoid negligent hiring, reference checks will be made about all

candidates who pass this hurdle. The five questions recommended to ask are, “How does your work

experience equip you for this job?” “What types of correspondence were you responsible for?” “What

types of data were you responsible for in your work experience?” “What information were you

responsible for processing?” and “Tell me about some projects or assignments in which you had to pay

great attention to detail.” Other questions can be used at the discretion of management. Focusing on

the interviewee’s communications skills should serve as another predictor. This skill will be rated

subjectively by the interviewer. Answers should be rated on a 1-5 basis (1 being the lowest rating

[Marginal], 5 being the highest rating [Outstanding]) with notes recorded in the process to document.

The selection of a candidate is management’s decision. The selected candidate will be assessed on their

performance by the SVP, the supervisor of this position.

After a sufficient amount of time on the job, each Program Associate II will be assessed on their

performance. Using a Likert Scale, supervisors will rate each Program Associate II on a 1-5 scale (1 being

the lowest rating [Fails to meet goals], 5 being the highest rating [Significantly exceeded goals])


according to how well they met the goals being assessed. Supervisors will rate each employee on

specific outcomes designated as being representative of job performance. Outcomes will include:

Finishes planned tasks on time and within time allocated; efficient management of tasks for existing and

new programs according to work plans; Up-to-date budget status reports tracking most current

expenditures is prepared on a monthly basis; collects program-related invoices within one month after

activity; open communication with the Senior Vice President and Finance Department; Makes necessary

follow-up calls and logistical arrangement to ensure timely receipt and analysis of evaluations; Produces

high-quality workshop/program/meeting and on-site consulting session materials; communications well

with and manages relationships with participants, funders, partners, consultants, and new contacts; and

maintains a professional working relationship and communicates well with all staff, board members, and

LMSC facilitators. The supervisor will have the opportunity to record comments on each outcome rated

for management to read. All information will be documented.

Results

A criterion-related validity study on the selection tools is recommended. Previous research has

been conducted on the EAS in the form of a meta-analysis. A total of 725 validity coefficients from 160

studies were collected. Among these, predictive criterion-related validity studies were reviewed to see

which applicants who took the EAS demonstrated strong levels of job performance after being on the

job for a sufficient time (Ruch, et al., 1994). Scores from the three subtests of Verbal Reasoning, Visual

Speed and Accuracy, and Numerical Reasoning were compared to the generalized mean true validity of

Clerical jobs in the study. Relatively strong validities were found among the subtests (Ruch, et al., 1994).

The generalized mean true validity scores for Clerical jobs and Verbal Reasoning was .46; Clerical jobs


and Visual Speed and Accuracy was .46; and Clerical jobs and Numerical Ability was .46. The reliability

scores of subtests showed high reliability; Verbal Reasoning, .82; Visual Speed and Accuracy, .91; and

Numerical Ability, .87 (Ruch, et al., 1994).

For an entry level job such as this, Huffcutt and Arthur (1994) showed mean validity of

interviews generally increases with increasing levels of structure.

PSI’s Basic Skills Test has been validated in accordance to the Uniform Guidelines (EEOC, 1978).

Each subtest focused on for this selection tool has shown good validity and reliability. Validity

coefficients were gathered from a concurrent study involving clerical jobs (Ruch, et al., 2001). The

validity for Clerical jobs and Following Oral Directions was .39; Clerical jobs and Following Written

Directions was .36; and Clerical jobs and Forms Checking was .34. The reliability scores of subtests

showed strong reliability; Following Oral Directions, .66; Following Written Directions, .75; and Forms

Checking, .72 (Ruch, et al., 2001).

Results of the performance appraisal from the supervisor to the subordinate should be

beneficial to the subordinate. Becker & Klimoski (1989) found that feedback from supervisors to

subordinates on job performance is more highly related to performance than that from any other

source.

Discussion

After reviewing criterion-related studies on the EAS and BST, it is recommended that

management use the six subtests identified to highlight three candidates that will be brought in for a

structured interview. From there, it is management’s decision to hire the desired candidate. This is

recommended because of the strong predictive validity scores of the three EAS subtests to job

performance in the job family of Clerical, as well the strong validity coefficients of the three subtests

within the BST. This implies that there is a strong relation between the subtests and job performance in


Clerical jobs. Since the validity scores in the EAS were generalized mean true validity scores, one can feel

more assured that the findings can be generalized to other Clerical positions such as the position of

Program Associate II. The predictors involved among the subtests focused on have shown to be valid

predictors of job performance for clerical jobs in particular (Pearlman, 1979; Ghiselli, 1966).

Management can also estimate the proportion of employees who will be superior performers

because of the validity of the selection tools. Because the selection tool validity is .46 across the three

subtests of the EAS, if 1/10 that apply will be selected to be employed, Taylor Russell tables indicates

that there will be a 62% increase in superior workers [(.81 - .50) / .50]. In the BST, the Taylor Russell

tables indicates that there will be a 48% increase in superior workers [(.74 - .50) / .50] (Taylor and

Russell, 1939).

The proposed selection procedure will be used as a multiple hurdle. First, the candidates have to

pass the minimum qualifications hurdle. Next, a candidate must score in the top 3 of a composite tests

scores for the six subtests between the EAS and BST. Then, those candidates will be brought in for a

structured interview. At no point will a question in the structured interview be asked regarding a

candidate’s race, sex, national origin, sexual preference, or age. This will avoid any legal challenges

during selection.

The position description (attached as appendix A) is to be used for recruitment of candidates. It

will include a purpose statement, minimum qualifications, roles and responsibilities, and duties of

successful incumbents. In the future, this position description should be updated if any relevant

technology advances come about or if roles or responsibilities have changed. The EAS and BST protocol

on how to use it is attached as Appendix B and will include the specific subtests to assess candidate. It is

recommended in the future that selected candidates’ test scores on the EAS and BST be compared to

job performance after a sufficient amount of time on the job, for revalidation purposes.


Ratings scales for the performance appraisal was chosen because it is easy for management to

craft to their discretion, easy to use, has a very low cost attached to it, and no training is required to

conduct this performance appraisal. One thing to be wary of is the idea of rater’s bias. A supervisor

could be biased in the rating of a subordinate but because of the closeness between the supervisor

(SVP) and subordinate (Program Associate II), it is recommended that this performance appraisal

method for this position. The biggest advantages to management is the ease of use and low cost

associated with rating scales. In addition, because of the fact that the Program Associate II is working so

closely with their supervisor, performance goals that the supervisor prefers will likely be set. Research

has shown that supervisor ratings may reflect whether or not the employee is contributing to goals

valued by the supervisors (Hogan & Shelton, 1998). It can be used by management for increases of pay

decisions as well as disciplinary decisions if need be. The performance appraisal will give management a

good idea if the employee’s performance is in congruence with organizational outcomes and if they are

performing up to the standards of the organization.

Because of the validity of the selection tools, as well as how well it predicts job performance in

clerical jobs, it is recommended that this selections battery be utilized by management for the selection

of the position Program Associate II. Rather than utilizing a personality measure, it is recommended that

management use cognitive tests such as the ones recommended in the selection battery. The selection

tools in the selection battery focuses in on the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to effectively

perform this position. The selection battery has the ability to increase productivity in superior workers,

predict excellent job performance, and reduce turnover by hiring competent employees that will

effectively perform the job. The performance appraisal suggested will assess employees on these

knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to effectively perform the job as well as how consistently they are

meeting the goals set by the supervisor.


References

Becker, T.E., & Klimoski, R.J. (1989). A field study of the relationship between the organizational feedback environment and performance. Personnel Psychology, 42, 343-358.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Service Commission, Department of Labor, and Department of Justice (1978). Uniform guidelines on employee selection procedures.

Ghiselli, E.E. (1966). The validity of occupational aptitude tests. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Guilford, J.P., & Fruchter, B. (1978). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. (6th ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Guion, R.G., & Highhouse, S. (2006). Essentials of personnel assessment and selection. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Hogan, R., & Shelton, D. (1998). A socioanalytic perspective on job performance. Human Performance, 11, 129-144.

Huffcutt, A.I., & Arthur, W. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Pyschology, 79(2), 184-190.

Pearlman, K., Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1980). Validity generalization results for tests used to predict job proficiency and training success in clerical occupation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(4), 373-406.

Pearlman, K. (1979). The validity of tests used to select clerical personnel: A comprehensive summary and evaluation. (TS-79-1) Washington, DC: Personnel Research and Development Center, U.S. Off of Personnel Management.

Ruch, W.W., Weiner, J.A., McKillip, R.H., & Dye, D.A. (2001). PSI basic skills tests for business, industry, and government. Los Angeles, CA: Psychological Services, Inc.

Ruch, W.W., Stang, S.W., McKillip, R.H., & Dye, D.A. (1994). Employee aptitude survey: Technical manual. (2nd ed.) Glendale, CA: Psychological Services, Inc.

Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J.E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection method in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262-274.

Spearman, C. (1904). ”General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201-293.

Taylor, H.C., & Russell, J.T. (1939). The relationship of validity coefficients to the practical effectiveness of tests in selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23, 565-578.


Appendix A

Official Job Title: PROJECT ASSOCIATE II

Working Title (if different)

Supervisor’s Name:

Supervisor’s Title: SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT

JOB DESCRIPTION

Position Purpose:The purpose of the position of Program Associate II is to provide administrative and programmatic

assistance & support to the Senior Vice President; to all existing and new Latino, Native American, African American, and Senior Women of Color Academies; to Bank of America’s Neighborhood Builder Leadership Program (NBLP) and Neighborhood Excellence Initiative (NEI); to Board Members; and to the office in general.

Minimum Qualifications:1. High School Diploma2. 3 years of administrative/clerical work or a Bachelor’s Degree to replace.

Roles & Responsibilities:

1. Administrative support to Senior Vice President when on the field, i.e. timesheets, faxes, etc.2. Participate in the design, management, logistical planning and coordination, delivery, evaluation and

administration of TCLI’s new and existing Academy programs. 3. Plan and coordinate all Academy meetings, including Funder Orientations, Advisory Committees, Selection

Teams, Trainer, Faculty meetings, etc.4. Coordinate workshops and on-site consulting schedules - perform requisite research, planning,

production, administrative, logistic and communication functions.5. Produce high quality training materials and other products. 6. Coordinate on-site workshop arrangements and audiovisuals. 7. Set up and maintain online communications with participants, partners, consultants, funders, facility

managers, new contacts. 8. Coordinate, monitor, and schedule maintenance and supply of office technologies (hardware/software,

office equipment, computers, telephones etc.)9. Monitor, maintain and order program-related items. 10. Monitor, maintain and order books, videos, reports and handouts for workshops and on-site consulting

sessions. 11. Participate in program teams, all staff activities and carry out other tasks as assigned by Supervisor. 12. Spanish/English translation.13. Coordination and management of portfolio of new programs.

Duties:


1. Planning and Budgeting:

a. Compile and use program work plans.b. Compile and use program budgets.c. Collect invoices to process for Finance.d. Compile, maintain and use funder report grid.e. Create and maintain database (Outlook & Salesforce).f. Compile and use weekly "to do" lists of priority tasks.

2. Logistics for New and Existing Programs:

a. Coordinate calls and meetings with participants, funders, partners, consultants, facility managers, new contacts.

b. Plan and coordinate assorted meetings by program.c. Academy invites, selection process and orientation call coordination.d. Research workshop facilities.e. Negotiate workshop facility contracts.f. Create on-site consulting schedules.g. Coordinate staff/consultant travel and hotel reservations.h. Compile workshop and on-site consulting consultant contracts.i. Research workshop curriculum and handouts.j. Produce workshop programs, binders, handouts and evaluations.k. Coordinate all binder production and assembly for all types of meetings.l. Meeting room set-up and on-site coordination and problem solving.m. On-site coordination at workshops, meetings and special events.n. Coordinate workshop and on-site consulting schedule logistics.o. Conduct research for funder proposals and assist with proposal submissions.p. Assemble and mail informational follow-up packets to participants, funders, partners, consultants,

facility managers, new contacts.q. Assist with travel advance requests.r. Translation – English/Spanish.s. Interaction with interns on programmatic assignments.t. Training to administrative person on Co-Training Partner staff on all logistics.

3. Communications:

a. Participate in staff, board and team meetings and all staff events.b. Participate in database/tech meetings and discussions.c. Coordinate calls/e-mails with Board members for Board meetings.d. Create and maintain database (Outlook & Salesforce).e. Cybergrants backup, trainings and evaluations for Senior Vice President and selff. Order office supplies.g. Troubleshoot and problem solve with TechServe.h. Set up and manage phone system and communication with TechServe to maintain current.i. Open/Distribute mail.

4. Management:

a. Communicate directly with program participants, partners, consultants, funders, facility managers, new contacts.


b. Board members’ travel and occasional hotel and car rental coordination including initial contact, options provision, confirmation of contact information, booking, forwarding of reservation confirmations, and any questions for meetings.

c. Receive and process Board reimbursement invoices and requests for Finance.d. LMSC members’ travel and hotel coordination including initial contact, options provision,

confirmation of contact information, booking, forwarding of reservation confirmations, and any questions for NEI Program Phase 2.

e. Provide NEI manager an expense sheet of LMSC members’ costs with confirmations for NEI Program Phase 2.

f. Preparation of Travel Advance Requests for CEO.g. Travel, hotel and car rental coordination including initial contact, options provision, confirmation of

contact information, booking, forwarding of reservation confirmations, and any questions for all Program, Management and Board meetings for CEO.


Appendix B

Employee Aptitude Survey (EAS)

Type of Subtest Description EAS 2 – Numerical Ability Test is designed to measure ability in addition, subtraction,

multiplication, and division of whole numbers, decimals, and fractions. Examinee will be asked to complete one of these functions and be presented with four numerical options and an option to indicate that the correct answer was not listed.

EAS 4 – Visual Speed and Accuracy Assesses candidate’s ability to see details quickly and accurately by presenting 150 items to the candidate that consist of pairs of number series that may include decimals, letters, or other symbols. Candidate then has 5 minutes to review as many pairs as possible and indicate whether each pair is the same or different.

EAS 7 – Verbal Reasoning A series of facts are presented to the candidate to review. Each series is followed by five conclusions in which the candidate has to indicate, based on the factual information give, whether the conclusion is true, false, or uncertain.

Ruch, et al. (1994).

PSI Basic Skills Test (BST)Type of Subtest Description

BST 7 – Following Oral Directions The examinee listens to a 6.5 minute tape recording of conversations that take place in an employment setting. Taking notes is allowed. The examinee the reads questions based on the information contained in the tape recording, selecting the correct answer from five alternatives. Number of items: 24; time limit: 5 minutes

BST 8 – Following Written Directions The examinee reads a set of rules and then determines what action to take in various situations by applying the rules. The examinee then selects the correct answer from three or four alternatives. Number of items: 36; time lime: 5 minutes

BST 9 – Forms Checking The examinee reads a paragraph and then checks to see if a corresponding form has been completed correctly on the basis of information presented in the paragraph. The examinee then indicates whether the form is correct or incorrect. Number of items: 42; time limit: 5 minutes.

Ruch, et al. (2001).

Multiple Hurdles in Selection Process1st Hurdle

If candidate does not meet minimum qualifications, do not bring them in for EAS and BST assessment.2nd Hurdle


Candidates who pass the first hurdle will be brought in for testing. Among the scores collected, the top three composite scores among the six subtests will pass this hurdle.3rd Hurdle

Candidates who pass the first two hurdles will be brought in for a structured interview with management. Interview Protocol is below. After the interviews are finished, it is recommended that management select the highest rated interviewee to be employed.

Interview ProtocolIt is recommended that each candidate brought in for an interview with management be asked the same questions in the same manner. Communication skills should be subjectively assessed by interviewer. After each responses is given, the interviewer must subjectively rate each answer on a 1-5 scale:1 – Marginal2 – Below Average 3 – Average4 – Above Average5 – Outstanding

Five recommended interview questions are: How does your work experience equip you for this job? What types of correspondence were you responsible for? What types of data were you responsible for in your work experience? What information were you responsible for processing? Tell me about some projects or assignments in which you had to pay great attention to detail.


Appendix C

Performance Appraisal

Rating Scale Protocol:

For each outcome to be rated, the supervisor will subjectively rate the level of performance of the Programs Associate II on a 1-5 scale:1 – Fails to meet goals2 – Less than consistently met goals 3 – Consistently met goals4 – More than consistently met goals5 – Significantly exceeded goals

Employee will be rated on the following outcomes: Finishes planned tasks on time and within time allocated. Efficient management of tasks for existing and new programs according to work plans. Up-to-date budget status reports tracking most current expenditures is prepared on a monthly

basis. Collects program-related invoices within one month after activity. Open communication with the Senior Vice President and Finance Department. Makes necessary follow-up calls and logistical arrangement to ensure timely receipt and analysis

of evaluations. Produces high-quality workshop/program/meeting and on-site consulting session materials; Communications well with and manages relationships with participants, funders, partners,

consultants, and new contacts. Maintains a professional working relationship and communicates well with all staff, board

members, and LMSC facilitators.

pap final - phillip hash

Documents