Methods


A Battle of Wills


When it comes to selecting your selection methodology, the two main heavyweights in contention are competencies and strengths. While competencies have a reputation for being a tried-and- tested method that has been in use for a number of years, increasingly, a number of high-profile organisations have ditched competencies in favour of a strengths-based approach. We asked a range of AGR members to explain their methodology of choice, and why their approach works for them…


C


Strengths are the things that we


ompetencies and strengths - what’s the difference? The CIPD defines a competencies as “the


do well and enjoy doing. Using our strengths feels authentic and energising, and enables us to deliver successful performance.”


behaviours (and, where appropriate, technical attributes) that individuals must have, or must acquire, to perform effectively at work – that is, the terms focus on the personal attributes or inputs of the individual… competencies are typically used to define the behaviours that an employer values and believes will help achieve its long-term goals. These behaviours


typically include things such as:


communication skills, people management, team


skills, customer service skills,


results-orientation, problem-solving.” (www.cipd.co.uk)


Alex Linley, Director of strengths-based management consultancy, CAPP shares his definition of what we mean by ‘strengths’: “Strengths are the things that we do well and enjoy doing. Using our strengths feels authentic and energising, and enables us to deliver successful performance.”


Competencies − Costain Ltd Indy Lachhar, Sustainability and Emerging Talent Manager for engineering and construction firm, Costain Ltd, shares her top five reasons for choosing to use competencies when assessing applicants: 1. Real life relevance − Examples provided by candidates are based on real-life situations/experiences and especially for our students that have completed an internship that are applying for full time graduate programme roles, their examples are more than likely to be based on experiences within our organisation.


2. Adaptability − We are able to test how they would perform or react in specific situations and whether that matches what we are looking for and how easily they would adapt to the role.


3. Universal criterion − It is a fair process where candidates are selected against the same criterion which is aligned to Costain’s behavioural competency framework.


4. Aids graduate development − We have found it to be a reliable and accurate form of assessment which has also helped us to support the graduate’s development once they join the Graduate Development Programme.


5. Tracking learning − We are also able to see how easily they learnt from past behaviours or situations and how they have maintained or improved those behaviours.


26 Graduate Recruiter | www.agr.org.uk


Strengths − Nestle Tom Banham, Nestlé Academy Recruitment Manager shares the five reasons why Nestlé have benefitted from introducing an end-to-end strengths- based assessment process for all Graduate, Internship, School Leaver and Apprenticeship hires.


“As a business we made the bold decision to adopt a strengths-based assessment model due to the following factors; graduates were not fast tracking through our business, we had a weak internal talent pipeline, assessors were disengaged with the old process and we did not have an aligned process from attraction through to appointment. Since the inception of the strengths-based approach in 2012 we have been analysing our campaign results at each stage across our schemes. As a business we are delighted with the difference and I have summarised the reasons why I think it’s making such an impact.


1. Assess for potential − We know from analysing successful leaders and graduates within Nestlé, what the key behaviours and characteristics are in order to achieve success. Our strengths-based approach allows us to assess our early career population to see if they have the potential to demonstrate these behaviours regardless of their background or past experience.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36