Application 1 & 2

activity 1 Evaluation of Two New Assessment Methods for Selecting call in Customer Service Representatives 1. The dependability for both the clerical and the work exemplifications atomic number 18 favorable. We see in the Clerical Test that the co-efficient alpha (at . 85 and . 86) and the try out-retest (. 92) are both laid-back so we have an acceptable degree of reliability for the test. For the stimulate Sample (T) & Work Sample (C) we find the inter-rater agreements to be lavishly at with Work Sample (T) being T1=88% and T2=79% and Work Sample (C) T1=80% and T2=82%, both supra the 75% formula requirement for a reliable measure.Since all three show a decent level of reliability, it would be safe for Ph adeptmin to white plague them in selecting virgin-sprung(prenominal) chore applicants. 2. The coefficient of correlations among the tests show a low correlation between the Clerical Test and both of the Work Samples however, on that point is a high correlation bet ween the two Work Samples. The Work Samples produce in reality like outcomes, with error rate and speed being non-significant and complaints significant.With the Work Samples producing similar results, those who were tactful also show concern for the customer, Phonemin should just choose one of the Work Samples along with the Clerical test to select the best applicants for new job applicants due to the similar results. 3. Current CSRs were chosen to participate in the study, since they are already in the job their effort on the test could be different than a new applicant and they most probable have gained some additional knowledge, especially when handling complaints, having been on the job for a period of time.Also, are the measures real indicators of performance? It was mentioned that the KSAOs chosen were apparent to be necessary for successful performance as a CSR and they their patently high impact on job performance if they are not true indicator, wherefore the test fa ils to predict the performance that Phonemin is looking for. Application 2 Conducting Empirical Validation 1. Is the PS score a sound predictor of performance as a store manager? Yes. A correlation (R-Value) of . 407 exceeds the statistical significance threshold of . 7 and indicates a moderately high correlation between the PS scores and performance as a store manager. The following scatter diagram illustrates this correlation visually. age there are 2 outliers, their presence is not significant replete to disprove the correlation and the use of the PS score as a sensible predictor. 2. With a cut score of 7 on PS, would its use lead to contrary impact against women? Yes. A cut score of 7 leads to a selection rate in females of 53. 33% versus 56. 67% in the entire sample. Against minorities?No adverse impact to minorities. Selection rate of minorities is actually higher than non-minorities when a cut score of 7 is used. If there is adverse impact, does the validity evidence j ustify use of the PS anyway? Because the sample size is relatively small, the adverse impact to women seems insignificant and not overflowing to justify discontinuation of using the PS scores as predictors of in store(predicate) performance. 3. There are several limitations of this study. The first one would be cogitate to the correlation (R-value).The correlation does not equate to a percentage. The R-Value calculated above of . 407 does not equate to 40. 7% but rather it equates to 16. 56% (. 4072 X 100) common variability of the scores. A second limitation of the R-Value is that it is affected by the amount of diversity in each set of scores. The less variation there is in one or both sets of scores then the smaller the calculated R-Value will be. When there is a lack of variation in scores this leads to what is known as the problem of restriction of range.A triplet problem that whitethorn arise is that the formula used to calculate correlation assumes a linear relationship between the two sets of scores however, this assurance may not always be true. A relationship may exist other than a straight line that may become the nature of the scores better. It is also important to remember that just because there is a correlation between two scores does not misbegotten that there is a causation between them. The R-Value does give you an indication owever, of the specialty of the relationship between the PS score and the performance rating and the precaution of the relationship. 4. It is recommend that Yellow Blaze use the PS score in making future forward motion decisions. It does seem to be a valid predictor of performance ground on the correlation (R-Value) and the scatter diagram. Also, based on the calculations performed using the PS score for making future promotion decisions would not lead to adverse impact on a far-flung basis.