The list of testable skills is one of several output products of the interactive dialog. KSAs are associated with each discrete task. The list of testable skills is generated from the KSAs, which are generated from the final list of discrete tasks selected. Although an assessment could be created for any of the KSAs, the list of testable skills consists of skills that can be measured objectively. For example, the skill "data entry of at least 40 words per minute with at least 97% accuracy" can be tested with a typing test.
Items in the list of testable skills may be used in defining testable selection criteria, or in planning training programs and on-the-job performance assessments.
A skill is a demonstrated capability to exercise knowledge or ability in performing a task satisfactorily. Skill indicates a level of proficiency such that requirements for successful performance (e.g., accuracy, latency, timeliness, or quality) are met consistently. For example, "time management" is a skill that is demonstrated by successful balancing of multiple competing demands on one´s time.
A skill is a testable skill if it can be measured objectively. Some testable skills are associated with explicit performance criteria (e.g., "complete initial required response to a major incident within 5 minutes"); others are not associated with explicit performance criteria, but can still be measured objectively (e.g., "quickly coordinate with outside agencies for incident management").
There are two general methods that may be used to assess testable skills. In the first method, an objective test of the skill is obtained or developed. For example, consider the skill "data entry of at least 40 WPM with at least 97% accuracy." This skill could be tested by requiring an employee to take a typing test. One advantage of this method is that all aspects of the assessment can be designed to be objective.(1) Each employee is tested and scored the same way each time. A disadvantage is that a brief test only assesses a short period of the employee’s behavior when the employee is most likely trying his or her best, and may not be indicitive of the typical performance of the employee.
In the second method, someone observes an employee’s performance on the job (or in a simulated job setting) and rates the employee´s skill level. For example, a supervisor could monitor whether an employee is able to "implement error free procedures from the System Operator Manual within 2 attempts." One advantage of this method is that mitigating circumstances can be considered in the assessment. For example, the employee may have committed an error because of another employee’s mistake. A disadvantage is that ratings are subjective evaluations. For example, the supervisor may unintentionally rate an employee more highly than is justified on a particular skill because the employee performs other skills extremely well. In this method, the observer is not necessarily a supervisor. Employees could be asked to rate themselves in a self-assessment, or co-workers could be asked to rate each other in a peer assessment. Both self-assessment and peer assessment have potential problems.(1) Employees tend to avoid giving themselves low ratings. Co-workers tend to dislike evaluating each other, and their assessments may be biased by friendship.
There are several ways to determine acceptable performance for each skill. First, acceptable performance could be derived from overall system objectives. For example, if the TMC has an overall objective to disseminate information about major incidents within 10 minutes and 5 minutes are required to prepare the information for dissemination, then the TMOT must be able to detect major incidents within 5 minutes. Second, acceptable performance could be derived from the task environment. For example, if 10% of callers speak Spanish, then the TMOT must be able to speak conversational Spanish and be familiar with Spanish words and phrases associated with traffic information. Third, acceptable performance could be based on the skill level demonstrated by incumbent employees. Fourth, acceptable performance could be based on estimates provided by subject matter experts, such as job incumbents or supervisors. An additional factor to consider is whether acceptable performance is different for entry level positions versus full performance or advanced positions.
The results from an assessment of testable skills can be used for a variety of human resource management decisions. The results from a skills assessment, as a part of a performance appraisal, can be used for employee performance feedback, promotion decisions, wage and salary administration, placement decisions, evidence regarding termination, and needs analysis for training. Keep in mind, however, that using an assessment of testable skills for a human resource management decision requires the ability to demonstrate that the skills are job relevant, which usually requires a job analysis and a demonstration that the skills are related to different levels of performance.(1)
Return to Main Tutorials Page