Development Centre as in talent development
It is a sharing content intended to HR BPs of one pharma company and aiming at providing you with the basics of Development Centre (DC) and how it is developed and utilised in the industry.
Three sections were presented in the sharing:
- DC Basics:Basic info regarding DC, and differences between Assessment Centre (AC) and DC
- DC Details: DC related closely to business; different modules serve different purposes
- DC Practices: General application in China and pharma industries (here I will omit this part as it includes quite a lot of client information)
DC Basics
Development centres have gained wide recognition as a systematic and rigorous means of identifying behaviour for the purposes of development within the workplace. It should be broadly perceived as a process rather than a physical centre.
As in previous experiences, a good DC provides following benefits:
−Highly relevant/observable and comprehensive information.
−Added fairness from multiple judgements (versus single judgements).
−An enhanced image of the organisation among participants.
−An effective preview of the role or job level.
−Developmental payoffs to participants arising from self-insight obtained.
−Developmental payoffs to observers arising from involvement in the process.
−A method of assessment that predicts work performance.
They are essentially multiple assessment processes, and there are various ways in which that is so: a group of participants takes part in a variety of exercises, observed by a team of trained observers, who evaluate each candidate/participant against a number of predetermined, job-related behaviours. Decisions for development are then made by pooling shared data.
In nature AC and DC are almost the same, save the purpose of its process and results, so the major differences rest with its flavour and ownership. The following table could give us a clue.
DC Details
As such a complicated and costing mechanism, DC always receives skepticism regarding its validity, effectiveness, objectivity and positive linkage with business, and thus indeed it requires HR people, or their partner, to design DC from the perspective of business and employ multiple methods to ensure relevance and validity, as illustrated in following points:
So usually in the design stage of a DC, it would take a lot of efforts to do job analysis, or interview incumbents as well as stakeholders (usu. management and leaders) to understand strategic requirements, key challenges, as well as business scenarios (existing or upcoming). In this way we can make our simulations (key parts in a DC) vivid and relevant.
Apart from these content and process, it is also important to remember a DC, as emphasis is on development, consistent and comprehensive development activities should always in presence to support the gaps identified and really embed development in business activities, so here comes the rationale of structuring a DC, or more broadly development programme:
Under this rationale, here comes the different combinations of measures or modules, and it is always upon organisation’s needs and investment (this is important as DC is usually quite costly). For some companies, DC employed as a means for succession planning which lasted for around 16 months cost around $1.2 mil.
Usually some surveys/tools would be used to assess the participants, to identify the gaps for the organisation (where to start) and for the individuals (to break status quo and rebuild their perspectives), and through a feedback session, to help participants further understand what needs to be done to close these gaps, so as to enhance their ownership on development. Then based on the identified needs, we design training programmes which should incorporate challenging experiences, as in adult learning theory, the most effective way of learning to through experiencing, and such is usually exhibited in action learning or rotation which provide the places to apply what they have acquired in class or seminars.
Consequently, there are three types of measures/modules to be considered to take in a DC:
And according to different needs and investment, there are various DC forms in practices:
- General competency focus: this primarily uses standard tools to assess general competencies and provide feedback session to help develop IDP.
- Functional focus: this primarily uses simulation to re-create work-related scenarios to test and hypothesise best practice in confrontation with variou issues, thus developing work-related competencies.
- Balanced focus: A blended process to review past working record and situational competency exhibition for the widest range of participant’s capabilities.
- Leadership focus: A very comprehensive and rigourous process to identify needs and plan and implement development, usually for succession planning of higher management.
Details are as follows:
To conclude, DC is really a tailor-made process, according to organisation’s needs, business environment, talent landscape, and investment, which would generate quite varying experiences for participants.
Reference:
Psychological Testing Centre, “Design, Implementation and Evaluation of Assessment and Development Centers”
Hay Group, “A Guide To Assessment and Development Centers”, 1996.