... a Viable Option for Selecting People and Not as Bad as It Looks: Two Global Executive Assessment Consultants with Perspectives from a Practitioner Standpoint

Beginning of article

The study of effective selection and assessment methods in any rigorous way is, by and large, an academic discipline with often only the most superficial distillations of the results penetrating through to the mainstream business world, despite the huge sums spent by organisations on recruitment activities. However, as a manager; one of the most important things we do is to select our people and at executive level a poor selection decision can often have a major impact on a business. A study cited by Bennis and O'Toole in Harvard Business Review (Autumn, 2000) found that since 1995 one third of the Fortune 100 companies had changed their CEO and that only some of the changes were due to natural reasons. They go on to argue that a major cause of failure in appointments is that insufficient attention is paid to leadership as a selection criterion. Dawes' article, though academic in tone and content, deals with one of the most critical factors facing business.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

His article makes two key points the first being that actuarial methods (i.e. the use of mathematical equations) of combining data make better predictions than 'experts' combining data (i.e. individuals using their intuitive understanding and experience). His second key point is that the actuarial method is rejected as a practical tool precisely because it yields specific data, which shows that it makes relatively ineffective predications. His third point implicit in the title is …