Thanks to everyone who responded to my query about administering a skills
assessement to candidates for our Information and Technology Coordinator
position.

I received many varied responses, all the way from a question about this
perhaps being a Theory X management technique to an assertion that the best
three employees hired by the respondent were those who had been tested
during the interview process.  Many agreed that skills testing is
appropriate, especially since we require skills testing for some other
positions (e.g., typing tests) and because this particular position is
technical in nature.  Several respondents questioned how such an assessment
would be valuable if the candidate had good skills, but on software other
than what was available in our office.  Still others were concerned about
the fact that there is no industry standard for testing such things as
email, net surfing, and web page development skills.  (I called local
offices of three national employment agencies to inquire about their
testing protocols.  They all administer typing, word processing, and
spreadsheet tests.  But none of them yet have any tests for internet and
intranet skills.  They just rely on information on the application and
confirmation from previous employers.)  One respondent noted that there may
be a concern with the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures.
These regulations prohibit tests which do or may result in adverse
selection against protected classses.  Another respondent noted that her
institution was concerned about the possibility of lawsuits from
individuals who believe such tests may be biased in some way and, thus, do
not use them.  Finally, I heard from one person who has had experience as a
candidate when testing was part of the interview.  She offered some
excellent suggestions to make the assessment as low stress as possible.

I would especially like to thank Suzanne Huard (UNH) for taking the time to
suggest some specific questions that we can ask in the interview about
candidates' skills.  I've built those questions into our standard
face-to-face interview protocol.  I think they will be so good at ferreting
out the real level of understanding of the functions this person will be
doing that we may not find the skills assessment necessary at all.

Partly because of the input you all gave, here is our new plan.  We will
review and rate applications to determine who should be interviewed.  In
addition to looking for evidence of specific skills with software that we
use, we will look for similar skills that can be applied in our work
environment with only a little "retooling" time.  Toward the end of the
face-to-face interviews, we will ask candidates if they have any objection
to participating in the skills assessment if they are selected as one of
our top contenders.  We will tell them the areas that will be covered in
the assessment (e.g., email, spreadsheets, net surfing, web page
development, SPIN use).  After all the face-to-face interviews are
conducted, we will go to the assessment only if there are remaining
questions about the skills of the leaders or if two or more candidates are
extremely close in our rating.  If we do go to the skills assessment, we
will do everything possible to control the physical environment--including
using the same computer, using a private room, disconnecting the telephone,
providing clear workspace, etc.--so that testing conditions do not vary
from candidate to candidate.  .  One of the major things that we cannot
control is net speed, but we will minimize that variable by scheduling
everyone in the morning (before California logs on) and by providing ample
time to complete the exercises, even if the net is slow.  Of course we will
have standardized criteria by which to judge the results of the
assessments.  It is my hope that, with Suzanne's suggested questions, we
will not need to proceed to the "testing" stage, but it will be an option
if we decide that we can't live without it.  My Human Resources Department
has agreed with this approach, even though it may mean bringing candidates
in twice.

Note that I keep saying "we" when I talk about the selection process.  Our
state regulations call for a panel to recommend persons for hire for a
position of this level (even though, as one respondent suspected, the pay
is grossly low in comparison to the skill level we are seeking--an inherent
and major problem with the South Carolina state personnel pay scale).
Including myself, there are four panel members, including a faculty member
in the computer science department who teaches PC classes.  Despite the
logistical problems of getting us all together for meetings and interviews,
having a panel to interview candidates and review the skills assessment, if
needed, makes me much more comfortable with the process because,  in my
opinion, it gives every candidate the best and fairest shot at the job.

I think this whole issue of how to staff a sponsored programs
office--including finding the right candidates for the jobs--is something
that would make an excellent session for an NCURA and/or SRA meeting.  We
all face this situation over and over again in our working lives, often
without much training or internal support.  I do thank you all for the
"external" support on this one--y'all are great!

Barbara H. Gray                            Telephone:   803-953-5673
Director of Sponsored Programs      Fax:            803-953-6577
College of Charleston                     e-mail:         xxxxxx@cofc.edu
Charleston, SC  29424