The as­sess­ment centre: a method for pre-em­ploy­ment testing

A company is nothing without its employees, so good ones are vital. Es­pe­cially with employees requiring a skillset, the wrong choice can cause some problems. When choosing the right employees, it is not only the pro­fes­sion­al qual­i­fic­a­tion which plays a role, but also soft skills, general problem solving ability, and agreeing with the values of the company. These factors cannot be easily re­cog­nised in a CV. Short in­ter­views only give a rather su­per­fi­cial im­pres­sion of the candidate. The as­sess­ment centre with the cor­res­pond­ing tests and exercises reveals much more: Does the applicant fit into the company or not?

The as­sess­ment centre (AC) is a method by which ap­plic­ants go through various job as­sess­ment tests, mainly psy­cho­lo­gic­al, to check their suit­ab­il­ity for a job. It is therefore a form of pre-em­ploy­ment testing. As a rule, can­did­ates are invited to the selection procedure for one or more days and compete more or less against each other. You will be ac­com­pan­ied by so-called assessors: pro­fes­sion­al observers, who are usually also involved in the pre­par­a­tion of the tests and who at the end take over the eval­u­ation. The ob­ser­va­tions during the entire process play just as important a role as the actual test results.

In job as­sess­ment tests, there is usually no or very little expert knowledge required. Whether an applicant has the pro­fes­sion­al qual­i­fic­a­tion for a job ad­vert­ised is usually checked be­fore­hand on the basis of their CV. The AC is located in a later ap­plic­a­tion round in which the circle of ap­plic­ants has already shrunk to a man­age­able group. During the as­sess­ment, the can­did­ates are checked for the following questions through special exercises:

• How does the re­spond­ent react to stressful situ­ations?
• What is the can­did­ate's group dynamic behaviour like?
• How well does the candidate deal with unknown problems?

These key questions already show that the results of the tests are actually of secondary im­port­ance. The examiners, on the other hand, pay attention to behaviour during the task: for example, one wishes for a calm, ana­lyt­ic­al candidate who can suc­cess­fully master chal­lenges both alone and in a group – even under stress. The psy­cho­lo­gic­al reports thus give an im­pres­sion of whether the candidate is generally suitable for such a (man­age­ment) position – re­gard­less of the actual field of work.

The selection procedure is com­par­at­ively complex: While a typical job interview can be conducted without extensive pre­par­a­tion, on your own premises, and with the company's employees, as­sess­ment centres are far more costly and time-consuming. Many companies decide to rent extra rooms and have the process carried out by an external, spe­cial­ised company. Therefore, as­sess­ment centres are usually only suitable for the selection of ex­ec­ut­ives or at least for positions in the upper range.

However, some companies also allow trainees and vo­lun­teers to go through pro­ced­ures like this – es­pe­cially if they intend to commit them­selves to the future employee for a long time. Large companies, in par­tic­u­lar, not only use as­sess­ment centres for personnel selection, but also have employees checked by the procedure. In the context of personnel de­vel­op­ment, employees can be selected for further training.

Since the first pre-em­ploy­ment tests were carried out (selection pro­ced­ures like these go as far back as the Chinese Middle Ages), various versions have been es­tab­lished in companies. Technical de­vel­op­ments also play a role.

The classic as­sess­ment centre takes between one and three days to find an applicant for an ad­vert­ised position (usually a man­age­ment position). A man­age­able group of ap­plic­ants is invited to complete several hours of exercises and tests, partly alone and partly in the group.

In the case of in­di­vidu­al ACs, there is no co­oper­a­tion within the group. The applicant is con­sidered com­pletely isolated from other can­did­ates. The main reason for this is data pro­tec­tion. Other ap­plic­ants should not always learn about each other, e.g. if invited can­did­ates are still in an em­ploy­ment re­la­tion­ship that has not been ter­min­ated. In addition, wrong decisions, e.g. due to con­trast­ing effects, can be avoided in in­di­vidu­al as­sess­ments.

In most cases, as­sess­ment centres are conducted to select the right person for a specific job. But this does not always have to be the case: The as­sess­ment centre can also be used as an analysis tool for existing teams. In a man­age­ment audit, for example, managers are checked for per­form­ance and de­vel­op­ment potential. This is usually followed by changes in personnel policy. Since employees are part of the company value, a man­age­ment audit can also be part of the as­sess­ment of this value, e.g. in the context of a takeover by another company.

The de­vel­op­ment as­sess­ment centre (also known as the "de­vel­op­ment centre") tries to find po­ten­tials for im­prove­ment. Par­ti­cipants are employees of a company. As with other forms of AC, the strengths and weak­nesses of the par­ti­cipants are analysed in the tests. This can be followed by an in­di­vidu­al eval­u­ation, which provides the employee with in­form­a­tion on the points in which they need to improve in order to increase their per­form­ance and overall career op­por­tun­it­ies. The company man­age­ment can also provide the in­di­vidu­al employee with more effective further training measures in this way.

Through further technical de­vel­op­ments, as­sess­ment centres can also be carried out online. Par­ti­cipants do not have to arrive at a specific location at a specific time, but can take the pre-em­ploy­ment tests from home and often at a time of their choice. The can­did­ates have to solve tasks and tests via input masks and ques­tion­naires.

In order to simulate the stress situation of the classic as­sess­ment centre, time limits or time meas­ure­ments are often a visible part of the tests, i.e. the time runs as soon as the applicant activates the selection procedure. Personal con­ver­sa­tions or group tasks are usually omitted, although this would also be possible via internet-based video telephony. The stand­ard­ised tests make computer-aided eval­u­ations possible.

The advantage of online as­sess­ment centres is that it saves time and money for both ap­plic­ants and companies. The dis­ad­vant­age, however, is that there is no personal ob­ser­va­tion of the candidate, which results in a more su­per­fi­cial result than in the classic procedure. In addition, the applicant must ensure that all technical re­quire­ments are met through­out the entire duration of the test. Even today, this is not ne­ces­sar­ily the case.

Every as­sess­ment centre is different, and yet all are in some ways the same: certain exercises or situ­ations occur in most ACs. What they all have in common, for example, is that they create a stress situation for the can­did­ates. It is not intended for ap­plic­ants to feel par­tic­u­larly com­fort­able. Instead, the stress factor is ar­ti­fi­cially increased. Under these con­di­tions, they are given unique but also typical as­sess­ment centre tasks.

At the beginning of em­ploy­ment testing as­sess­ments, an interview usually takes place, which comes close to a classic job interview. Instead of the question-and-answer game, however, a free self-present­a­tion can also be required of the candidate. This serves, on the one hand, to get to know the candidate better. On the other hand, there are first hints on how the par­ti­cipant acts in such situ­ations, which for most are rather un­pleas­ant. Sov­er­eignty and au­then­ti­city are qualities that are in the fore­ground here.

Role-playing is also likely to occur in all as­sess­ment centres. Role plays usually take place in a group, if it is not an in­di­vidu­al as­sess­ment centre. Different, mostly contrary roles are dis­trib­uted among the group members. Typical examples are fic­ti­tious con­ver­sa­tions between leaders and sub­or­din­ates that arise out of a fic­ti­tious tense situation. The con­ver­sa­tion between buyer and seller is also common. Both sides are observed: How do the people deal with conflicts and how willing are they to com­prom­ise, but also how con­vin­cing are the par­ti­cipants?

The mailbox exercise is almost legendary: ori­gin­ally with actual mailboxes, but now also carried out on computers with e-mail software, messages, notes and ap­point­ments have to be processed – under time pressure. What is stored in which folder? What needs to be processed im­me­di­ately? What do you pass on to col­leagues? An ad­di­tion­al dif­fi­culty arises from the fact that some tasks con­tra­dict each other and new incoming messages throw the newly created system overboard. With this as­sess­ment centre test, assessors primarily test par­ti­cipants for or­gan­isa­tion­al talent, ef­fect­ive­ness, and the ability to work properly even under time pressure.

Case studies are also popular. Here the can­did­ates are presented with concrete cases from the company’s everyday life, either in a group or in­di­vidu­ally. After a fixed time, the can­did­ates have to present a solution. Since case studies are not as abstract as other as­sess­ment centre exercises, spe­cial­ist knowledge is also required. In addition, these tasks can be used to test general problem-solving com­pet­ence and, under certain cir­cum­stances, the ability to work in a team. However, the solution itself is not the only thing that is con­sidered in the end. Assessors also ask the ap­plic­ants questions about the procedure. Each in­di­vidu­al should describe how they developed the solution.

Another classic task in as­sess­ment centres is the fact-finding exercise, which largely cor­res­ponds to the principle of the case study, since a concrete problem must also be solved here. The dif­fer­ence: Not all relevant in­form­a­tion is given to the ap­plic­ants. On the other hand, an un­in­volved third party is provided who serves as an expert for the research. With specific questions, the par­ti­cipants must obtain all the in­form­a­tion required for the solution from the expert. In addition to problem solving, the ability to carry out searches suc­cess­fully also plays an important role.

Stand­ard­ised ques­tion­naires are par­tic­u­larly popular for online as­sess­ments, but are also used in classic as­sess­ment centres. A dis­tinc­tion is made between in­tel­li­gence tests and psy­cho­met­ric tests. The former are known to measure the in­tel­li­gence quotient. Psy­cho­met­ric tests, on the other hand, aim to find out more about the per­son­al­ity of the test persons. If the in­ter­views are carried out using software, the eval­u­ation can also be carried out very quickly.

Each as­sess­ment centre session ends with a final dis­cus­sion. In a con­fid­en­tial one-on-one interview, the candidate is asked about their ex­per­i­ences, and asked for a self-as­sess­ment. Here, the par­ti­cipant also has the chance to address bad per­form­ance during the AC and explain it. Then the assessors also give feedback and explain how they assess the candidate. In some cases, position ac­cept­ances or can­cela­tions are made. However, the selection is often made at a later date after having enough time to evaluate the results.

Since as­sess­ment centres usually last one to three days, there are regular breaks. These breaks are spent in part in the presence of the examiners, so perhaps these breaks aren’t the respite they seem. There are lots of different ways you could be assessed during a break, ranging from table manners, to driving habits to how you have a normal con­ver­sa­tion. This doesn’t mean, however, that you need to be paranoid, or change how you normally behave. As you can see in the three examples of break as­sess­ment above, these ob­ser­va­tions are all based on every day in­ter­ac­tions, and it might just boil down to how you fit in with the rest of the company. These are hardly part of official as­sess­ments, but assessors still perceive things as they spend time with you, and so it can be con­sidered to be part of the AC.

Due to the intense in­ter­ac­tion with the ap­plic­ants, you can get a much more detailed idea of each in­di­vidu­al. A letter of mo­tiv­a­tion, CV, and job interview give a good first im­pres­sion and convey the technical skills. But to actually get to know the applicant, it is best to see them in person. This can only happen during work-like activ­it­ies. The as­sess­ment centre tries to minimise un­cer­tainty by dealing with the candidate in detail, and under special con­di­tions.

Whether a person is stress-resistant, team-oriented, and solution-oriented can only be found out in a less intensive ap­plic­a­tion process. En­tre­pren­eurs and HR must rely on the state­ments of the applicant. The as­sess­ment centre is usually carried out by experts. The as­sess­ments therefore take place on the basis of spe­cial­ist knowledge, in contrast to the job interview, where you may have to resort to gut feeling. A thorough ex­am­in­a­tion of the ap­plic­ants ensures greater sat­is­fac­tion on both sides, because the future employee fits in better with the company, meets the re­quire­ments, and will ul­ti­mately feel better. Fluc­tu­ations are reduced.

However, the as­sess­ment centre does not just bring benefits. Most obvious drawbacks are the costs involved. Since a company will in most cases opt for an external company to carry out the AC tasks, it can be expected that the AC is cost heavy. In addition, there may be ad­di­tion­al rent for premises and the cost of boarding and ac­com­mod­at­ing ap­plic­ants. The as­sess­ment centre is also very com­plic­ated for them: they invest time and travel, and in the end there may not be a new job.

However, the as­sess­ment centre is only an effective selection procedure if no meth­od­o­lo­gic­al errors creep in. Assessors must pay par­tic­u­lar attention to three pitfalls: ma­nip­u­la­tion, conflicts of interest, and sympathy decisions. The tests them­selves are also dangerous. De­fect­ively provided, stand­ard­ised tests can let you recognise which answer is favoured by the assessors and potential employers. In this way, ap­plic­ants in the as­sess­ment centre can easily ma­nip­u­late their own present­a­tion.

It is also important not to forget, es­pe­cially with external assessors, that they are only human beings and are sus­cept­ible to sub­ject­ive decisions. Companies that offer as­sess­ment centres must generate sales and justify their results. This pressure can lead to falsi­fic­a­tion of the results. In addition, even auditors in an AC are not free of sym­path­ies: Ex­tra­ver­ted persons are usually judged better than reserved ap­plic­ants – even if this char­ac­ter­ist­ic does not ne­ces­sar­ily say anything about their qual­i­fic­a­tions.

For en­tre­pren­eurs, the as­sess­ment centre may be the perfect selection procedure. For most par­ti­cipants, however, the in­vit­a­tion to the AC is as­so­ci­ated with thoughts of horror. However, this is not only un­ne­ces­sary, it also reduces the chances of shining in the tasks and tests. Those who are nervous in advance will probably find it even more difficult under the ar­ti­fi­cial pressure. That's why most of the tips are less aimed at concrete task solutions, but rather at a general, above all calm con­sti­tu­tion during the procedure.

Since the concrete tasks are not known in advance, it is hardly possible to prepare solutions. Although it may be advisable to practice the mailbox exercise in advance, it doesn’t ne­ces­sar­ily have to be used. Due to its enormous pop­ular­ity, more and more as­sess­ment centres are ceasing to use this exercise – the par­ti­cipants are too well prepared for this situation.

What you can actually practice in advance, if you are not already trained in it: free speaking and present­ing. In every as­sess­ment centre, you get the situation of having to give a present­a­tion. Either about a certain topic or simply about yourself. By getting into a routine in present­ing, the present­a­tion becomes more relaxed and at the same time you appear more pro­fes­sion­al: less faltering, fewer filler words, more attention from the listeners.

In addition to this ability, it is above all the attitude that can be in­flu­enced. Ap­plic­ants should not regard the as­sess­ment centre as a tough test under con­tinu­ous ob­ser­va­tion, but as an op­por­tun­ity to prove their own abilities. If you bear these simple pieces of advice in mind, you’re prepared as best as you can be.

As an applicant, one must bear in mind that assessors have probably been suc­cess­fully carrying out their pro­fes­sion for several years. In the process, they have developed a knowledge of human nature. They notice im­me­di­ately when you are pre­tend­ing. If you recite learned phrases by heart, it will be very obvious to the assessor. Instead, par­ti­cipants should behave as naturally as possible. Per­fec­tion is not expected.

In most pro­fes­sions, a healthy level of ambition and the will to win are well received. But those who ex­ag­ger­ate their com­pet­it­ive attitude will quickly lose points in an as­sess­ment centre. The other par­ti­cipants in the AC should not be perceived as com­pet­it­ors, but as col­leagues – this also helps to prove the ability to work in a team.

Just as in the job interview, the hated question of one's own weak­nesses will also arise in the as­sess­ment centre. Of course, everyone wants to present their strengths, but it is important to be aware of their weak­nesses – and to show them. This proves the will­ing­ness to work on the weak­nesses. If you des­per­ately try to hide your less positive side, you will convey the wrong signals.

The will­ing­ness to com­prom­ise is a very important factor, which is also closely related to the desire to work in a team. But if you don't take any stand­points, you're either dishonest or not assertive. If you express different views during in­di­vidu­al and group dis­cus­sions, you directly dis­qual­i­fy yourself. To speak up for important points of view, but also to show un­der­stand­ing for other views – that might be the better way.

Under the pressure of an as­sess­ment centre, you might easily lose your nerve. However, this is never an excuse for being un­friendly, rude, or impatient with the other par­ti­cipants or assessors. You won’t prove your own strength by making others feel worse. Therefore, saying bad things behind others’ backs is never a good idea and karma is guar­an­teed to get its revenge.

All par­ti­cipants of an as­sess­ment centre are in the same boat. They were all invited because they stood out from perhaps several hundred ap­plic­a­tions. That's why you shouldn't feel too much in the spotlight as an applicant. If you think only of yourself and your own per­form­ance, solve tasks alone, and always want to set the tone in in­ter­views, it shows that you cannot work in a team. You make a better im­pres­sion if you support the other par­ti­cipants.