Being Academically Brilliant Is Not Enough To Pass Assessment Centres
Uchechi Moses
Like or despise them, assessment centers are here to stay. More and more companies are finding assessment centers aka ACs cheaper and more of an indicator of candidates’ fitness for the job than conventional interviews. Hitherto, companies moved from the aptitude test stage to the interview. However, they came to discover that most candidates don’t perform well on the job; interpersonal skills are poor; no group thinking; poor leadership qualities etc. Getting a job goes beyond acing the aptitude tests. That is, a high score during your Dragnet or SHL test does not guarantee employment.
Questions are: Can you effectively work with others? Can you disagree with another without rancour? Can you study a case within a group without raising your voices like market women? Can you make a point logically and be time conscious? Can you know when to stop talking and allow others talk? These and many questions are what assessors look for in candidates during ACs.
Like the heading says: Being academically brilliant is not enough to pass an assessment center. Note that every candidate in an AC is brilliant and smart. Yes, companies want smart people in their teams. They desire employees with proper cognitive reasoning and who are intelligent to solve their problems. However, while firms are on the lookout for those characteristics, they also look out for people that can work effectively with others. After all, you will work with humans not robots. Are you someone who readily disagrees with everyone’s suggestion without proffering solution? Or possesses a temper that cannot be accepted in the workplace? Or cannot contribute meaningfully to a discussion?
To pass an assessment center, you need to be cognizant of the situation, adaptable and receptive. This is different from an interview where you might attempt to exert your personality on the situation.
AN ASSESSMENT CENTER IS NOT A COMPETITION
Yes, you would be wondering, after all others also desire the job as much as I do. Why should I not compete? At most ACs, some candidates view others as “enemies” who they must fight against. One major point assessors look out for during ACs is “working with others – effectively”. If you exhibit the character of “they are my enemies”, and I must compete with them, trust me, you are on your way to failure. You are assessed against the firm’s criteria not against the other candidates. An uber-competitive attitude could easily come across as arrogance.
ACs provide the opportunity to excel through a variety of exercises, and as such are more accurate to choose between individuals.
WHAT NOT DO IN AN ASSESSMENT CENTER
1. Don’t be domineering: There are candidates who are naturally domineering in any exercise they find themselves doing. An AC is not the place to exhibit such attitude. You are working with others not against others. They believe that by showing themselves in such manner, they would be loved or are “team-members”. This is wrong. You should allow things run naturally, and make way for others to contribute.
2. Don’t be the silent person: An exact opposite of 1. These candidates possess the philosophy that “it is better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt”. Yet another route to failure, this time silently. You have to participate in ACs – making logical points – and play your part. One way is by making your point at an auspicious moment. For example, during a case study when everyone is discussing the case but missing a crucial point, you could interject by saying “while I appreciate everyone’s contribution, I believe (not think; you must exert confidence in whatever point you are making) we are missing a point by not taking note of this data”. Although, you might have been silent throughout the exercise, but have made an important observation. However, to pin-point an error during a case study exercise requires attention and concentration on the case.
3. Don’t waste time. Prioritise. Group A is given a case to study for 30 minutes and they spend 27 minutes discussing endlessly, then attempt to summarise their points and come up with an agreement within the last three minutes. On the other hand, Group B prioritise their time to: 2 minutes to introducing themselves; 3 minutes to understanding the case individually; 15 minutes to studying it and coming to a conclusion as a group; 5 minutes to harmonising their points and choosing a presenter on behalf of the group. Then they are left with free 5 minutes. If you were the assessor, which group will you say perform optimally at the stipulated duration?
4. Don’t berate your presenter: On no account should you berate your presenter during an AC, even if s/he is presenting rubbish or out-of-point. There have been occasions where candidates display a “mogbe” sign when their presenter is on the stage. It shows you are not a supportive member and will easily admonish him/her when asked individually. Or not paying attention during the presentation? That is wrong. Relax, pay attention, and remember you are being assessed.
Finally, inasmuch as you are gunning for the job, you should exhibit attitudes of being a team-member and contribute to discussions meaningfully. In the words of one of the assessors at JarusHub Assessment Center Coaching class, not everyone in the group can pass an AC, but everyone can fail.
http://www.jarushub.com/why-academic-brilliance-is-not-sufficient-for-success-in-assessment-centers/
Like or despise them, assessment centers are here to stay. More and more companies are finding assessment centers aka ACs cheaper and more of an indicator of candidates’ fitness for the job than conventional interviews. Hitherto, companies moved from the aptitude test stage to the interview. However, they came to discover that most candidates don’t perform well on the job; interpersonal skills are poor; no group thinking; poor leadership qualities etc. Getting a job goes beyond acing the aptitude tests. That is, a high score during your Dragnet or SHL test does not guarantee employment.
Questions are: Can you effectively work with others? Can you disagree with another without rancour? Can you study a case within a group without raising your voices like market women? Can you make a point logically and be time conscious? Can you know when to stop talking and allow others talk? These and many questions are what assessors look for in candidates during ACs.
Like the heading says: Being academically brilliant is not enough to pass an assessment center. Note that every candidate in an AC is brilliant and smart. Yes, companies want smart people in their teams. They desire employees with proper cognitive reasoning and who are intelligent to solve their problems. However, while firms are on the lookout for those characteristics, they also look out for people that can work effectively with others. After all, you will work with humans not robots. Are you someone who readily disagrees with everyone’s suggestion without proffering solution? Or possesses a temper that cannot be accepted in the workplace? Or cannot contribute meaningfully to a discussion?
To pass an assessment center, you need to be cognizant of the situation, adaptable and receptive. This is different from an interview where you might attempt to exert your personality on the situation.
AN ASSESSMENT CENTER IS NOT A COMPETITION
Yes, you would be wondering, after all others also desire the job as much as I do. Why should I not compete? At most ACs, some candidates view others as “enemies” who they must fight against. One major point assessors look out for during ACs is “working with others – effectively”. If you exhibit the character of “they are my enemies”, and I must compete with them, trust me, you are on your way to failure. You are assessed against the firm’s criteria not against the other candidates. An uber-competitive attitude could easily come across as arrogance.
ACs provide the opportunity to excel through a variety of exercises, and as such are more accurate to choose between individuals.
WHAT NOT DO IN AN ASSESSMENT CENTER
1. Don’t be domineering: There are candidates who are naturally domineering in any exercise they find themselves doing. An AC is not the place to exhibit such attitude. You are working with others not against others. They believe that by showing themselves in such manner, they would be loved or are “team-members”. This is wrong. You should allow things run naturally, and make way for others to contribute.
2. Don’t be the silent person: An exact opposite of 1. These candidates possess the philosophy that “it is better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt”. Yet another route to failure, this time silently. You have to participate in ACs – making logical points – and play your part. One way is by making your point at an auspicious moment. For example, during a case study when everyone is discussing the case but missing a crucial point, you could interject by saying “while I appreciate everyone’s contribution, I believe (not think; you must exert confidence in whatever point you are making) we are missing a point by not taking note of this data”. Although, you might have been silent throughout the exercise, but have made an important observation. However, to pin-point an error during a case study exercise requires attention and concentration on the case.
3. Don’t waste time. Prioritise. Group A is given a case to study for 30 minutes and they spend 27 minutes discussing endlessly, then attempt to summarise their points and come up with an agreement within the last three minutes. On the other hand, Group B prioritise their time to: 2 minutes to introducing themselves; 3 minutes to understanding the case individually; 15 minutes to studying it and coming to a conclusion as a group; 5 minutes to harmonising their points and choosing a presenter on behalf of the group. Then they are left with free 5 minutes. If you were the assessor, which group will you say perform optimally at the stipulated duration?
4. Don’t berate your presenter: On no account should you berate your presenter during an AC, even if s/he is presenting rubbish or out-of-point. There have been occasions where candidates display a “mogbe” sign when their presenter is on the stage. It shows you are not a supportive member and will easily admonish him/her when asked individually. Or not paying attention during the presentation? That is wrong. Relax, pay attention, and remember you are being assessed.
Finally, inasmuch as you are gunning for the job, you should exhibit attitudes of being a team-member and contribute to discussions meaningfully. In the words of one of the assessors at JarusHub Assessment Center Coaching class, not everyone in the group can pass an AC, but everyone can fail.
http://www.jarushub.com/why-academic-brilliance-is-not-sufficient-for-success-in-assessment-centers/
No comments:
Post a Comment