The Basics:
Assessment Methods

At SBLC, we believe that “gold standard” assessments often include the following…

​

1. Archival data: This data collection method can be the easiest to do and it can yield highly valuable information about participants.  Archival data, as we define it, is any electronic or written documentation which might feature or showcase the talents of an individual or professional. This may include past presentation decks, performance reviews, assessment results, etc.  Executives, once asked, are oftentimes agreeable to scan their hard drives, or perhaps “old-fashioned paper files”, to provide assessors these data.  Without question, the assessment expert’s understanding of the participant expands when this information is made available
    

2. Career/Biographical interview: Undoubtedly, this is the most popular assessment method and yet one of the most challenging to truly administer effectively.  (Done poorly, it is widely known that this can be an unreliable method in the evaluation of an individual).  Most professionals have had exposure to some form of this methodology, particularly in job interview situations. Of course, it involves a review of one’s background, primarily professional.  In addition, the measurement of competencies should be included in this interview.  If the organization (sponsor) does not provide its own unique set of competencies, SBLC can design/provide one to the sponsor.
    

3. Surveys/Psychometrics:  Most professionals have been exposed to a wide variety of surveys, questionnaires, etc.  Assessors at SBLC are certified in numerous psychometrics [LINK HERE TO ASSESSMENT BADGES???]. As such, the assessor can collaboratively decide with clients as to which survey instrument(s) would be most suitable for their unique and specific situations.
    

4. 360 feedback:  Many professionals who have worked in medium- or large-sized organizations have likely participated in a 360 feedback study.  This data can be very valuable in heightening the participant’s awareness of how they are perceived as a co-worker, direct report, or leader. In addition, the data provides an invaluable point of comparison with psychometric data, in order to see where there might be a convergence of findings (“convergent validity”) or where there may be somewhat contradictory (or mixed) results.  While this assessment method can greatly benefit both the organization and the individual, it is an optional step such that there are some instances (e.g. C-level succession) wherein the “public nature” of such a process would clearly not be advisable or may even be “illegal” (e.g. during M&A due diligence periods).
    

5. Direct Observation:  This method is exactly what it is labeled, namely the observations of the participant through formal or informal means.  “Formal” might involve the assessment expert attending a meeting or event where the participant is present.  The assessor takes notes and has the benefit of witnessing participants in real, “work-life” situations.  “Informal” includes any and all interactions that the assessment expert has directly with the participant which may include how the participants conduct themselves both prior to and after the formal assessment itself.  All of this data is “fair game” for assessors, integrating their first-hand observations and insights in the assessment feedback
    

6. Feedback Session:  Although a feedback report is generated before feedback to the organization’s sponsor, the participant feedback session itself generally offers the very best view of the true individual (see graphic below).  During feedback sessions, participants feel more vulnerable and oftentimes reveal more about their personalities through how they receive feedback.

 

The feedback session dovetails nicely into the Development Planning/Goal-Setting phase