Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

A Critical Examination of the Internal Consistency of Competencies Assessed Across Multiple Methods

  • Paul Englert (a1), Duncan J. R. Jackson (a2) and Marco van Gelderen (a3)

Abstract

Competency models represent a popular concept that is widely applied in such areas as human resource selection, performance management, employee development, and job analysis. Despite widespread popularity and applied use, little is known about the measurement properties of competencies and whether they can reasonably be used to provide meaningful feedback or as a basis for employment decisions. The present study evaluated the internal consistency of multimethod competency scores obtained from a developmental assessment centre. A total of 214 managers participated in this study. Results suggested that there was virtually no support for the idea that multimethod-derived competencies could be regarded as meaningful, internally consistent, underlying characteristics. The article argues that competency models that employ multimethod approaches merely provide a semantic framework for conveying the complexity of a person specification, a framework which is qualitative not quantitative. These findings are discussed in relation to their implications for behavioral assessment in employment.

Copyright

Corresponding author

*address for correspondence: Paul Englert, PO Box 10–914, Wellington, New Zealand.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

A Critical Examination of the Internal Consistency of Competencies Assessed Across Multiple Methods

  • Paul Englert (a1), Duncan J. R. Jackson (a2) and Marco van Gelderen (a3)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.