COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED SYSTEM FOR HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

Abstract

A system and method for testing and/or evaluating employees or potential employees is disclosed. An applicant terminal presents a first set of a plurality of questions to an individual, the answers to which are stored by an applicant screening server. An electronic predictor system is configured to predict at least one business outcome for at least one job performance criterion if the individual were to be employed by the employer based upon correlations of the stored answers with answers to sets of questions by other individuals for which post-hire information has been collected. A viewing system can provide an output indicative of the prediction and can determine a score for the individual and identify the individual as a favorable candidate if the score is over a norm.

Description

RELATED APPLICATION

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/878,245, filed Jun. 12, 2001, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/211,044, filed Jun. 12, 2000.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

To prevent discrimination in job hiring and promotion, in 1978 the U.S. Federal Government established rigorous standards known as the “Uniform Guidelines” for the use of testing and screening instruments used to distinguish among candidates for a given position. (41 CFR §§ 60-3). These standards are designed to prevent testing and screening instruments from creating an adverse impact on any minority or protected groups during the hiring or promotion of employees.

Over the last twenty years, a number of test booklets have been developed and published by various publishers in compliance with the “Uniform Guidelines.” One example is the Customer Service & Clerical Potential Inventory (“CSCPI”) developed by Richardson, Bellows, Henry and Co., Inc. The CSCPI is unlike most other tests in that responses are not right or wrong in the traditional sense. Instead, the performance of the group picking each individual item alternative has been statistically correlated across large samples of potential and actual employees for a position so as to create a test that can produce a total score for that position. This total score may legally be used as a factor in the hiring or promotion process.

With the advances in computer systems and the advent of the Internet, many different aspects of human resources management have been computerized, including online recruiting. In large part due to the rigorous standards imposed by the “Uniform Guidelines,” such online recruiting systems use only certain minimum candidate qualifications (e.g., college level degree, possesses a driver's license, number of years experience for a skill) as a way of identifying potential candidates for a position. It has generally been accepted in the human resources profession that choosing among potential candidates based only on minimum candidate qualifications will not run afoul of the rigorous standards imposed by the “Uniform Guidelines”.

Accordingly, it would be desirable to provide a computer-implemented system for human resources management that could overcome these limitations and provide further advantages in the testing and/or evaluating employees or potential employees.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is an electronic prediction system for assessing a suitability of job applicants for an employer. The electronic prediction system includes a plurality of terminals connected to the Internet, an applicant screening server connected through the Internet to the terminals that has a testing computer program that stores test data. A website identified is configured to present application questions to the applicants at the terminals and to receive applicant responses entered at the terminals in response to presentation of the application questions. The application questions include requirements questions eliciting information on whether the applicants meet employment requirements and a set of validated questions validated by correlating job performance ratings of a plurality of hired workers with previous responses given by the workers to the application questions before the workers were hired. The set of validated questions is a short subset of a large assessment selected to serve as a fast job-related pre-screen. A scoring system automatically scores the applicant responses in real time. The scoring system compares the applicant responses for requirements questions to employer requirements and being validated to predict both performance and turnover potential. A scoring database is connected to the applicant screening server. An applicant input system located on the employer's premises is configured to administer an in-depth assessment to an applicant at the employer's premises after the applicant has come to the employer's premises and logged on. A viewing system permits the employer to view applicant results from the electronic prediction system and the applicant's rank order, the applicant results providing information on applicants who have a high probability of performing successfully and not terminating early

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 provides a block diagram of an exemplary system in accordance with the present invention.

FIG. 2 illustrates a process for testing and evaluating job applicants in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 3 depicts a hiring procedure in accordance with one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a process employing feedback.

FIG. 5 diagrams an online system in accordance with one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6 shows an example of a web-based presentation for a screening solution.

FIG. 7 shows an example of a stack ranked table.

FIG. 8 shows an example of a screening solution question presented to an applicant taking a screening solution test over the Internet.

FIG. 9 shows an example of a structured interview guide for use in an interview solution.

FIG. 10 illustrates procedural steps that may be followed in a web-based applicant system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 11 illustrates procedural steps that may be followed in a web-based selection solution according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 12 illustrates procedural steps that may be followed by an employer according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 13 illustrates a human capital management life-cycle.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

A system for testing a job applicant provides a computerized stack ranking of multiple applicants, predictive of the comparative levels of successful job performance. The predictive stack ranking may be used as a dynamic interactive filter with a pool of applicants over the course of the evaluation or employment process. The system may utilize a communications network to communicate between an applicant terminal and a system server.

The system may be used for example for screening, selecting, retaining, assigning, or analyzing the job applicant. The job applicant can for example be a new job applicant, an employee seeking to retain a job, an employee seeking a different job in the same organization, or an employee being evaluated for retention, re-assignment, or promotion. Applicants may or may not know they are being evaluated.

Once an applicant becomes an employee, the system may collect data regarding the employee for use in a feedback loop informing the online hiring process and improving the accuracy of the predictive stack ranking. For example, the data may indicate the employer's rating of the employee's actual job performance. Such a rating can be cross-checked against the answers that the employee gave during the application process. The cross-checking can be used as feedback to refine the questions and evaluation criteria used at each stage of the hiring process. For example, the cross-checking may be analyzed to select from among many questions, a small subset having high predictive value. The small subset can then be used in a quick initial screening stage. Or, the small subset can be given greater weight than other questions in a computerized stack ranking of candidates.

FIG. 1 provides a block diagram of an exemplary system in accordance with the present invention. A job applicant can use applicant terminal 102 to communicate over network 104 with system server 106. Applicant terminal 102 may for example be a telephone handset, a personal computer, a workstation, a handheld wireless device such as those marketed under the trademarks PALM or HANDSPRING, or a Wireless Application Protocol enabled device such as a mobile phone. Network 104 may for example be the Internet, the World Wide Web, a wide area network, a local area network, a telephone network, a wireless communication network, a combination thereof, or any other link capable of carrying communications between an applicant terminal and a server.

System server 106 employs a testing computer program 108 and has access to a scoring database 110. System server 106 communicates with applicant terminal 102 in accordance with instructions from testing computer program 108.

System server 106 may communicate with employer server 112 over network 104 or over direct link 114. System server 106 is shown as a unitary server, but may be a distributed computing platform.

An applicant terminal may be remote from, or co-located with, system server 106 and/or employer server 112. For example, applicant terminal 102 may be located at a job applicant's home, applicant terminal 116 may be located at a job fair or employment office, and applicant terminal 120 may be located at an employer's location.

Partner server 121 may be linked to network 104 and system server 106 to facilitate integration of a business partner seeking to participate in the system of FIG. 1.

System server 106 may pose questions to a job applicant located at an applicant terminal, receive responses from the job applicant, and score the answers in accordance with scoring database 110. The scoring may take place in real time, i.e., while the applicant is still online, and may be reported in the form of a comparative stack ranking of multiple applicants. The stack ranking may be delivered from system server 106, over either network 104 or direct link 114, to employer server 112.

Scoring of each answer by system server 106 may be instant, i.e., before the next question is answered. Thus, adaptive testing techniques may be implemented over network 104. For example, the answers given by an applicant at applicant terminal 102 to questions propounded early in a test may determine which questions are propounded by system server 106 to the applicant later in the same test. In addition, if an applicant at terminal 102 provides an unacceptable answer to a disqualifying “knock-out” question, server 106 may immediately terminate the test.

These same adaptive testing principles may be applied to a software program used to support a real time interview, either in person or over a communications network. For example, an employer conducting an oral interview in person or over a telephone can enter a candidate's oral answer into employer terminal 124, which then communicates the answer to system server 106, which in turn suggests via employer terminal 124 the next question for the employer to ask the interviewee.

The system may test an online applicant for any competency desired, in any sequence. The tested competencies may be abilities, traits, knowledge, skills, etc., that have been proven relevant to and predictive of successful job performance. By way of example and not limitation, the following competencies may be tested:

1. dependability

2. agreeableness

3. critical thinking

4. problem solving ability

5. talkativeness

6. assertiveness

7. gregariousness

8. persuasiveness

9. achievement

10. education

11. experience

12. customer service orientation

13. customer focus

14. conscientiousness

15. self-confidence

16. motivation

17. revenue focus

18. cognitive ability

19. leadership

20. decision making

21. flexibility

22. commitment

23. learning ability

24. dedication

25. tenacity

26. number of jobs held

27. length of time in job(s)

28. working with information

29. supervisory potential

30. judgment

31. leadership

32. coaching skills

33. teamwork

34. interpersonal skills

35. business leadership

36. leadership motivation

37. self-leadership

38. interpersonal leadership

39. communication skills

40. management potential

41. likelihood of retention

42. self-control

43. energy

44. executive potential

45. listening orientation

46. language skills (English, etc.)

47. verbal reasoning

48. spatial ability

49. interest

50. motivation

Typically, system server 106 tests for certain ones of the competencies that have been proven to be predictive of successful performance of the type of job for which the applicant is being considered. The results of the testing are tabulated in a stack ranked table. The stack ranked table may rank a number of applicants against each other and list them in order, from first to last. The table may also present other information for each applicant. The other information may include, by way of example and not limitation:

1. Name

2. Identifying number (e.g. social security number).

3. Score achieved at various stages for various competencies.

4. Recommendation (or not) to continue the hiring process beyond each stage

5. Link to application information (e.g. address, resume details)

6. Contact information (phone number, e-mail address, mailing address, etc.)

7. Date of application

8. Success or failure in complying with knockout requirements for the job

9. Screening solution scores, presented as percentiles

10. A calculated recommendation to proceed or not to proceed with the applicant

11. Results (by competency) of the selection solution

12. Link to allow manual entry of the test answers if not done on computer directly by the applicant

13. A calculated recommendation to hire or not hire based on a weighted overall score of selection competencies (or other factors the hiring company wishes to use and that are approved as statistically valid and legally defensible)

14. Additional columns for storage of data from a structured behavioral interview

15. Additional columns for storage of data from other decision-making processes such as drug testing, reference checks, or medical exams.

A process for testing and evaluating job applicants may be described with reference to FIG. 2. Generally, applicant testing 201 includes providing a test to a job applicant and scoring the applicant's answers. The test may be administered online or it may be administered manually off-line. Scores are entered into a system for calculating a stack ranked table. Predictive stack ranking 202 generally includes ranking a job applicant against other job applicants in order from first to last or other comparative ranking. The other job applicants may be current job applicants, past job applicants, or fictional job applicants.

FIG. 3 depicts a hiring procedure in accordance with one embodiment of the invention. Announcement 302 may be an online job announcement such as a web page with an “apply now” hyperlink icon. The web page may reside on an employer's website or an employment agency website, for example. Or, an online job announcement may be a recorded announcement on a menu-driven telephone voice processing system. Alternatively, announcement 302 may be an offline job announcement such as a newspaper advertisement.

In response to announcement 302, an interested job applicant requests administration of screening test 304. Screening test 304 may be remotely administered and scored online, i.e., unproctored, with the scores being automatically provided to correlation and predictive stack ranking 306. Alternatively, screening test 304 may be administered manually with paper and pencil, and then graded by hand or machine, with the scores being provided to correlation and predictive stack ranking 306. The predictive stack ranking may for example be constructed by system server 106 or employer server 112.

Correlation and predictive stack ranking 306 totals the graded answers according to particular competencies known to be relevant to successful job performance. In a preferred embodiment, the questions to be asked at the various stages are selected for a particular type of job being offered in accordance with a proven relationship with desired business outcomes. Business outcomes can for example include: level of sales, customer satisfaction, quality measures such as fault rates, retention and tenure of employment, time keeping, learning ability, progression to more senior roles over time, and supervisor ratings of behavioral success. The particular type of job is defined in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Labor “O*NET” classification system. Some types of jobs might include customer service, technical, professional, or managerial. Various competencies are determined to be associated with desired business outcomes for a given type of job. These competencies are tested for at various solution stages with appropriate questions.

The appropriate competencies, questions, scoring, weighting, and ranking factors for a new job can be designed from historical tests for existing jobs, by applying statistical techniques and using the gathering of data on the Internet to ensure rapid validation of the new assessment solution. Confirmatory job analysis is used to determine the appropriateness of solutions for a particular job.

Correlation and predictive stack ranking 306 may be administered by a computer processor located at system server 106, for example. Predictive stack ranking 306 may give different weight to different questions, and may at any stage immediately disqualify an applicant providing an unacceptable answer to a “knock-out” question. Correlation and predictive stack ranking 306 may rank the applicant in order against other job applicants in a table. Correlation and predictive stack ranking 306 may be used to decide which applicants to invite for the next stage, selection test 308.

Selection test 308 is preferably conducted under supervised conditions, i.e., proctored. For example, selection test 308 may be administered in person. An in-person test may take place at a job fair, an employer's location, a job site, or an employment agency. An in-person test may include verification of the job applicant's identity, such as by examination of a photo identification document produced by a test-taker. Selection test 308 may be administered online or manually. Supervised conditions typically include observation of the test-taker during administration of the test. The answers to selection test 308 are graded and the results are incorporated in correlation and stack ranking 306.

Correlation and predictive stack ranking 306 may then update a previously created entry for the applicant and rank or re-rank the applicant in order against other job applicants. After this is accomplished, the highest ranking applicants may be invited for interview 310.

Interview 310 may be structured or unstructured, online or in person. If interview 310 is structured, a program leads the interviewer through the interview by suggesting questions one at a time. The program may be a list of questions written on paper or it may be a computer program resident for example in system server 106. The program suggests questions that are predetermined to be valid, i.e., proven to be associated with successful job performance and legally permitted. The interviewer can input the answers and/or a score for the answers, either after each answer or at the conclusion of the interview. This can be done via employer terminal 124, for example.

Interview 310 results in an interview score being provided to correlation and predictive stack ranking 306. Correlation and predictive stack ranking 306 is revised to reflect the interview score. In particular, the relative rank of the job applicants is reassessed.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a process employing feedback. Test design 402 is initially performed using industry-accepted standards. Test administration 404 tests and scores job applicants and/or incumbents. Employee performance evaluation 406 measures actual job performance of the applicant or incumbent after holding the job for a period of time. This information is fed back to test design 402 and/or test administration 404. Test design 402 may be revised to delete questions which were not predictive of successful job performance. This can be done for example by deleting questions whose answers bore no relation to performance evaluation 406 for a statistically valid sample. Test administration 404 may be revised by adjusting the weight given to certain questions or answers that showed an especially strong correlation to employee performance evaluation 406. For example, if test administration 404 is associated with correlation and predictive stack ranking 306, feedback from employee performance evaluation 406 may help determine how various job applicants are comparatively ranked against each other.

FIG. 5 diagrams an online computer based system 500 in accordance with one embodiment of the invention. Box 502 represents a job vacancy with a requirement for an online screening and selection solution. The vacancy can come to the attention of a potential job applicant in a number of ways.

For example, box 504 represents an online application via a hiring company's own website. A company offering a job may post a vacancy announcement on the company's website and invite job seekers to apply by clicking on an icon labeled “apply here” or the like. Box 506 represents a similar posting on an online job board. Box 508 represents candidates given a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) directly by the company. This may occur when the company offering a job identifies a potential candidate. Box 510 represents a media advertisement including a URL for a job. Thus, job seekers observing the advertisement can direct their browsers to the indicated URL.

At job fair 512, job seekers may be provided a URL associated with the company or the particular vacancy. Paper-and-pencil measures could also be used at job fairs and entered into the system. A computer terminal may be provided for use of job seekers at job fair 512, enabling job seekers to participate in the online system. Box 514 represents an executive search via a recruiter network. Job seekers relevant to the search are identified in recruitment firm applicant database 516. Database 516 can link to a URL associated with the job.

Preferably, no matter how a potential applicant becomes aware of or identified for a job opening in system 500, the potential applicant is considered at decision 520. Decision 520 asks whether applicant has completed the required screening solution 524. If not, the applicant at box 522 is given via e-mail, mail, or in person, a URL for assessment. For example, system 500 may send an e-mail message to a potential applicant, the e-mail message inviting the potential applicant to apply for vacancy 502 by directing a browser to a screening solution URL provided in the e-mail message. Alternatively, when a potential applicant is visiting a website at which decision 520 determines that the required screening solution has not been completed, the website host can provide a link to a web page identified by the screening solution URL. Decision 520 may be based on a potential applicant's name, e-mail address, and/or other identifying information.

Screening solution 524 is administered via the Internet and is hosted at the screening solution URL mentioned above. Screening solution 524 asks screening questions to ascertain if the applicant has the basic qualifications to do the job. These are based on questions typically asked by recruiters but which are statistically validated over time to ensure they are legally defensible and predictive. The questions may include a combination of biodata and personality measures. They may include self-assessments of skill levels appropriate to the job requirements. Screening solution 524 requires applicants to transmit elicited information over the Internet. A possible example of a web-based presentation for screening solution 524 is illustrated in FIG. 6. Screen shot 600 shows a portion of the presentation.

Once completed, screening solution 524 provides applicant feedback 540 and conveys applicant details and screening scores to stack ranked table of applicants 530. Applicant feedback 540 may provide a message to the online applicant indicating that the screening solution is complete, that the applicant has passed or failed the screening stage, and that the applicant may or may not be contacted in due course. Other information may also be provided to the applicant in the feedback pages, like a realistic job preview, recruiter phone number, scheduling information, etc.

Once an applicant has completed the screening solution, system 500 ranks the applicant in comparative order against other applicants in stack ranked table of applicants 530. A certain number or percentage of applicants in table 530 will be chosen for further consideration. For example, the applicants ranking among the top five of all applicants ranked in table 530 may be chosen for advancement in the system at this juncture. Information identifying the chosen applicants will be included on a “short list” as indicated by box 536.

The short list chosen at box 536 is transmitted to selection solution 538, at which the advancing applicants are invited to answer selection questions. Selection solution 538 asks additional questions and requires an advancing applicant to input answers. Preferably, the applicant completes selection solution 538 while sitting at a terminal located at one of the company's locations. The terminal communicates over the Internet with a website set up to administer the selection solution.

At the conclusion of selection solution 538, applicant feedback 540 is provided from the website to the applicant, and applicant details and scores 541 are incorporated in stack ranked table 530. Feedback 540 may optionally include a sophisticated report on the applicant's strengths and weakness. The applicant may then be directed to an appropriate web page chosen by the hiring company. One page may indicated successful completion and a second page may indicate failure. The appropriate web page may suggest other openings appropriate to the applicant's test responses and may provide hyperlinks the applicant can use to initiate the application process for these other openings.

Once stack ranked table 530 re-ranks the applicants as a result of selection solution 538, some applicants are invited to participate in interview solution 542. For example, the top three applicants as ranked by table 530 after selection solution 538 may be invited for an in-person interview. Because the selection solution is preferably in instant communication with stack ranked table 530, the interview invitation may be extended immediately at the conclusion of the selection solution.

Interview solution 542 is preferably a structured interview, with questions provided via the Internet to the interviewer at the company's location. The interviewer reads the provided questions and reports a score over the Internet from the company's location for incorporation in stack ranked table 530. Benchmark performance anchors may assist the interviewer in grading the applicant's responses.

Interview solution 542 can be designed according two exemplary models. In a first model, an employer is provided with standard interview guides for several job types as well as the competency templates for these types so that the employer can build variations to meet specific needs. In a second model, an employer can build new interview guides and new competency templates. In the second model, the employer has access to the full array of work-related competencies and associated questions in a comprehensive question bank.

In ranking applicants, stack ranked table 530 may consider a combination of different biographical, personality, behavioral, and other appropriate information and competencies. In addition to the comparative ranking, table 530 may indicate for each applicant a yes/no recommendation, a percentage likelihood of successful job performance, biographical information not used for evaluative purposes, and so forth.

Stack ranked table 530 may be developed by grading the various solution stages with a computer implementing the following algorithm. First, search for disqualifying answers to “knock-out” questions. Second, give points for answers matching those of the previously hired candidates who achieved a successful performance evaluation. Third, deduct points for answers matching those of the previously hired candidates who received an unsuccessful performance rating. Fourth, multiply the added or subtracted points by any weighting assigned each question. Fifth, sum the points for all questions related to a given competency. Sixth, compare the summed points for each competency to norms of either the job-holders in the company or a wider population. Seventh, predict performance of the applicant as a worker in the job, based on the business outcomes identified by the hiring company and the competencies that contribute to those outcomes.

A final selection 546 is made based on stack ranked table 530. Preferably, the selection is transmitted over the Internet to the company, enabling the company to make an offer to the selected applicant(s). For example, if there is only one opening, an offer may be extended to the applicant ranked highest by stack ranked table 530. If the applicant accepts the offer, the applicant is employed by the company. If the applicant declines, the next highest ranked applicant in stack ranked table 530 is offered the job. If a plural number of openings exist, that number of applicants may be selected off the top of stack ranked table 530 and offered the job. If one of the applicants declines, the next highest ranked applicant in stack ranked table 530 is offered the job. Data from stack ranked table 530 is forwarded to data warehouse 534.

The performance of successful applicants is monitored during their employment. At box 550, performance data for successful applicants are collected at a later date, and sent 548 to data warehouse 534.

Data collected at data warehouse 534 are used for research and development and for reporting purposes. For example, functions enabled by storing comprehensive data generated by system 500 may include:

Storage of question level responses from applicants for jobs. This can be used for re-checking of applicant information (auditing etc.) and for research to develop new solutions and questions.

Reporting on Equal Employment Opportunity Commission requirements. Data on ethnicity etc. can be stored to enable an employer to comply with reporting requirements to government agencies.

Source of data for designing new solutions including data on the nature of the job and the competencies that are required by the role (job analysis). This data is collected using online assessments.

Source of data for statistical research on correlation between the solutions and their predicted outcomes for applicants, and the actual outcomes for employees who were hired (validation studies).

Design of solutions other than recruitment related solutions.

Reporting of usage volumes for billing and financing accounting purposes.

Because system 500 preferably uses instant communications, adaptive testing techniques may be implemented online. An applicant's failure to overcome hurdles in a given solution will deliver a different path through the solution than that of a successful applicant. The degree of advancement of a given applicant through system 500 may result in different charges to the company from a solutions provider. For example, a solutions provider that hosts a website supporting screening solution 524, selection solution 538, and interview solution 542 may charge the hiring company the following amounts: one dollar for every applicant completing only the screening solution, five dollars for every applicant advancing only to the end of the selection solution, ten dollars for every applicant rejected after the interview solution, twenty dollars for every applicant offered a job, and fifty dollars for every applicant accepting an offer.

In practice, any of the various stages (screening solution 524, selection solution 538, and interview solution 542) may be skipped, re-ordered, combined with other stages, or eliminated. Or, a short telephone interview may be structured early in the process to quickly screen applicants.

FIG. 7 shows an example of a stack ranked table. Computer screen shot 700 illustrates a sample stack ranked table 730 for a customer service job. Various tabs permit viewing of data generated by each solution stage. Tab 702 reveals data 703 from a screening solution, tab 704 reveals data 705 from a selection solution, tab 706 reveals data 707 from an interview solution, and tab 708 reveals all results. In screen shot 700, tab 708 is selected.

Section 709 of screen shot 700 shows general information about each applicant, including current rank 710, a link 712 to application information (not shown), last name 714, first name 716, and application date 718.

Screening solution data 703 includes an indication 720 of whether each applicant successfully passed the knockout requirements for the job. Data 703 also includes scores on certain competencies such as educational and work related experience 722, customer service orientation 724, and self-confidence 726. Column 728 indicates whether each applicant is recommended to advance beyond the screening stage.

Selection solution data 705 includes scores on certain competencies such as customer focus 732, conscientiousness 734, and problem solving 736. Column 738 indicates whether each applicant is recommended to advance beyond the selection stage. Column 740 includes a detailed report for each applicant, while column 750 includes a score.

Additional information (not shown) may include columns for storage of data from other decision-making processes such as drug testing, reference checks, or medical exams.

FIG. 8 shows an example of a screening solution question presented to an applicant taking a screening solution test over the Internet. In screen shot 800, simulated customer contact record 802 is presented to the applicant. The applicant is asked question 804, and is required to click on a circle next to one of the answers. Question 804 may test for a competency in working with information, for example.

FIG. 9 shows an example of a structured interview guide for use in an interview solution. As illustrated, the interview guide is being presented online on a computer screen to an interviewer conducting an interview with an applicant. Screen shot 900 shows interview item 902 for a sample customer service job. The customer service job opening is for a call center position, and revenue focus has been identified as a relevant and predictive competency. Item 902 elicits from the applicant a situation 904, the applicant's behavior 906 in the situation, and the outcome 908 reported by the applicant. The interviewer can grade the applicant's responses to item 902 by marking a score 910 from 1 to 10.

FIG. 10 illustrates procedural steps that may be followed in a web-based applicant system according to an embodiment of the present invention.

FIG. 11 illustrates procedural steps that may be followed in a web-based selection solution according to an embodiment of the present invention. For example, these steps may follow those illustrated in FIG. 10.

FIG. 12 illustrates procedural steps that may be followed by an employer according to an embodiment of the present invention.

The following tables provide examples of screening solutions and selection solutions designed for different types of jobs. The tables show components (competencies) shown to be relevant to successful performance of each job type. In the tables, some components are considered required, and others are considered optional.

TABLE ONE
Entry/General Skilled Solutions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 7-10 Minutes
Required	Educational and	Measures potential for	15
	Work-Related	success in entry-level jobs
	Experience	across industry type and
		functional area. Scores on
		Education and Work-Related
		Experience are derived from
		candidates' responses to
		questions regarding
		developmental influences,
		self-esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
	Self-Confidence	This component references:	7
		belief in one's own abilities
		and skills and a tendency to
		feel competent in several
		areas.
Optional	Decision	Measures potential for	8
	Making/	success in entry level
	Flexibility	positions. Scores on
		Decision Making and
		Flexibility are derived from
		candidates' responses to
		questions regarding
		developmental influences,
		self-esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
Screening 23-35 Minutes
Required	Conscientiousness	This component is designed	65
		to predict the likelihood that
		candidates will follow
		company policies exactly,
		work in an organized
		manner, return from meals
		and breaks in the allotted
		time, and keep working, even
		when coworkers are not
		working.
	Retention	Measures commitment,	44
	Predictor	impulsiveness, responsibility,
		and motivation. It predicts
		the likelihood that new hire
		will remain on the job for at
		least three months.
Optional	Leaning Ability	This component measures	54
		the tendency to efficiently	(12 minute
		and effectively use numerical	timer)
		and analytical reasoning.
		This competency is
		characterized by the ability to
		learn work-related tasks,
		processes, and policies.

TABLE TWO
Customer Service Solution
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 8-10 Minutes
Required	Educational and	Measures potential for	15
	Work-Related	success in customer service
	Experience	jobs. Scores on Education
		and Work-Related
		Experience are derived from
		candidates responses to
		questions regarding
		developmental influences,
		self-esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
	Customer Service	Designed to predict the	20
	Orientation	likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		sincerely for inconveniences
		to customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
Optional	Self-Confidence	This component references;	7
		belief in one's own abilities
		and skills and a tendency to
		feel competent in several
		areas.
Screening 17-29-27 Minutes
Required	Customer Focus	Designed to predict the	32
		likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		incerely for inconveniences
		to customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
	Conscientiousness	This component is designed	65
		to predict the likelihood that
		candidates will follow
		company policies exactly,
		work in an organized
		manner, return from meals
		and breaks in the allotted
		time, and keep working, even
		when coworkers are not
		working.
Optional	Learning Ability	This component measures	54
		the tendency to efficiently	(12 minute
		and effectively use numerical	timer)
		and analytical reasoning.
		This competency is
		characterized by the ability to
		learn work-related tasks,
		processes, and policies.
Optional	Retention	Measures commitment,	44
	Predictor	impulsiveness, responsibility,
		and motivation. It predicts
		the likelihood that a new hire
		will remain on the job for at
		least three months

TABLE THREE
Customer Service Solution: Sales Positions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 9-15 Minutes
Required	Educational and	Measures potential for	15
	Work-Related	success in customer service
	Experience	jobs. Scores on Education
		and Work-Related
		Experience are derived from
		candidates responses to
		questions regarding
		developmental influences,
		self-esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
	Customer Service	This component is designed	20
	Orientation	to predict the likelihood that
		candidates will show
		persistent enthusiasm in
		customer interaction,
		apologize sincerely for
		inconveniences to customers,
		be patient with customers,
		tolerate rude customers
		calmly, and search for
		information or products for
		customers.
Optional	Sales Potential	Designed to predict the	23
		likelihood that candidates
		will suggest or show
		alternative solutions based on
		customer needs, direct
		conversation toward a
		commitment/order/sale,
		show confidence even after a
		hard refusal/rejection, and
		strive to close a transaction
		every time.
Screening 15-27 Minutes
Required	Sales Potential	Designed to predict the	60
		likelihood that candidates
		will suggest or show
		alternative solutions based on
		customer needs, direct
		conversation toward a
		commitment/order/sale,
		show confidence even after a
		hard refusal/rejection, and
		strive to close a transaction
		every time.
	Customer Focus	Designed to predict the	32
		likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		sincerely inconveniences to
		customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
Optional	Learning Ability	This component measures	54
		the tendency to efficiently	(12 minute
		and effectively use numerical	timer)
		and analytical reasoning.
		This competency is
		characterized by the ability to
		learn work-related tasks,
		processes, and policies.

TABLE FOUR
Customer Service Solution: Call Center Positions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 9-11 minutes
Required	Educational and	Measures potential for	15
	Work-Related	success in customer service
	Experience	jobs. Scores on Education
		and Work-Related
		Experience are derived from
		candidates responses to
		questions regarding
		developmental influences,
		self-esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
	Customer Service	Designed to predict the	20
	Orientation	likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		sincerely for inconveniences
		to customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
Optional	Self-Confidence	This component references:	7
		belief in one's own abilities
		and skills and a tendency to
		feel competent in several
		areas.
Screening 16-31-39 Minutes
Required	Customer Focus	This component is designed	32
		to predict the likelihood that
		candidates will show
		persistent enthusiasm in
		customer interaction,
		apologize sincerely for
		inconveniences to customers,
		be patient with customers,
		tolerate rude customers
		calmly, and search for
		information or products for
		customers.
	Conscientiousness	This component is designed	65
		to predict the likelihood that
		candidates will follow
		company policies exactly,
		work in an organized
		manner, return from meals
		and breaks in the allotted
		time, and keep working, even
		when coworkers are not
		working.
	Working with	This component is designed	30
	information	to predict success in	(15
		customer service call-center	minutes
		jobs by assessing a	timer)
		candidate's ability to retrieve
		information and use it in
		order to solve problems.
Optional	Retention	Measures commitment,	44
	Predictor	impulsiveness, responsibility,
		and motivation. It predicts
		the likelihood that a new hire
		will remain on the job for at
		least three months.

TABLE FIVE
Customer Service Solution: Call Center Sales Positions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 9-15 Minutes
Required	Educational and	Measures potential for	15
	Work-Related	success in customer service
	Experience	jobs. Scores on Education
		and Work-Related
		Experience are derived from
		candidates' responses to
		questions regarding
		developmental influences,
		self-esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
	Customer Service	Designed to predict the	20
	Orientation	likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		sincerely for inconveniences
		to customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
Optional	Sales Potential	Designed to predict the	23
		likelihood that candidates
		will suggest or show
		alternative solutions based on
		customer needs, direct
		conversation toward a
		commitment/order/sale,
		show confidence even after a
		hard refusal/rejection, and
		strive to close a transaction
		every time.
Screening 30 Minutes
Required	Sales Focus	Designed to predict the	60
		likelihood that candidates
		will suggest or show
		alternative solutions based on
		customer needs, direct
		conversation toward a
		commitment/order/sale,
		show confidence even after a
		hard refusal/rejection, and
		strive to close a transaction
		every time.
	Customer Focus	Designed to predict the	32
		likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		sincerely for inconveniences
		to customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
	Working with	This component is designed	30
	Information	to predict success in	(15 minute
		customer service call-center	timer)
		jobs by assessing a
		candidate's ability to retrieve
		information and use it in
		order to solve problems.

TABLE SIX
Sales Solutions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 10-14 Minutes
Required	Educational and	Measures potential for	15
	Work-Related	success in customer service
	Experience	jobs. Scores on Education
		and Work-Related
		Experience are derived from
		candidates responses to
		questions regarding
		development influences, self-
		esteem, work history and
		work-related values and
		attitudes.
	Sales Potential	Designed to predict the	23
		likelihood that candidates
		will suggest or show
		alternative solutions based on
		customer needs, direct
		conversation toward a
		commitment/order/sale,
		show confidence even after a
		hard refusal/rejection, and
		strive to close a transaction
		every time.
Optional	Customer Service	Designed to predict the	20
	Orientation	likelihood that candidates
		will show persistent
		enthusiasm in customer
		interaction, apologize
		sincerely for inconveniences
		to customers, be patient with
		customers, tolerate rude
		customers calmly, and search
		for information or products
		for customers.
Screening 10-25-40 Minutes
Required	Sales Focus	Designed to predict the	60
		likelihood that candidates
		will suggest or show
		alternative solutions based on
		customer needs, direct
		conversation toward a
		commitment/order/sale,
		show confidence even after a
		hard refusal/rejection, and
		strive to close a transaction
		every time.
Optional	Problem Solving	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the ability
		to solve complex problems,
		and make reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning. This
		competency is characterized
		by the ability to verbally
		explain complex information
		to others.

TABLE SEVEN
Supervisory Solutions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 10-20 Minutes
Required	Supervisory	Measures potential for	10
	Potential	supervisory success across
		industry type and functional
		area. Scores on Supervisory
		Potential are derived from
		candidates' responses to
		questions regarding
		academic and social
		background, and aspirations
		concerning work.
	Judgment	Measures potential for	10
		making good judgments
		about how to effectively
		respond to work situations.
		Scores on Judgment are
		derived from candidates'
		responses to questions
		regarding situations one
		would likely encounter as a
		manager/supervisor.
Optional	Leadership/Coaching	Measures potential for	19
	Teamwork/	success as a supervisor. This
	Interpersonal Skills	is done by having applicants'
		make judgments about the
		most effective teamwork and
		leadership behaviors in
		specific work situations.
		Scores are determined by
		comparing their response
		profiles to the profiles of
		supervisors who are known
		to be successful.
Screening 22-37-52 Mins
Required	Business	Measures the candidate's	28
	Leadership	thinking styles. High scorers
		are likely to have or learn
		good planning and
		organizing skills, be
		innovative, consider issues
		from multiple perspectives,
		and create strategies to build
		their business.
Required	Leadership	Measures the candidate's	23
	Motivation	desire for achievement,
		drive, initiative, energy level,
		willingness to take charge,
		and persistence. High
		scorers are likely to be highly
		motivated to succeed and to
		set challenging goals for
		themselves and others.
	Self-Leadership	Measures the candidate's	32
		ability to control emotions,
		act with integrity, take
		responsibility for actions, and
		tolerate stress. High scorers
		are also likely to have a
		positive attitude, be
		optimistic about the future,
		and demonstrate high levels
		of professionalism.
	Interpersonal	Measures the candidate's	30
	Leadership	interpersonal characteristics.
		High scorers are likely to
		persuade and influence
		others, gain commitment,
		and build effective
		interpersonal relationships.
		They also have potential to
		develop skills in the area of
		employee relations,
		coaching, motivating, and
		leading a team.
Optional	Decision	Measures the tendency to	10
	Making/Problem	efficiently and effectively
	Solving	use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the ability
		to solve complex problems,
		and make reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning. This
		competency is characterized
		by the ability to verbally
		explain complex information
		to others.

TABLE EIGHT
Professional Solutions
	Solution
	Component	Definition	Items
Screening 7-Minutes
Required	Dependability	This competency is	40
		characterized to behave in
		expected and agree upon
		ways; following through on
		assignments and
		commitments; keep
		promises; and accept the
		consequences of one's own
		actions.
	Interpersonal Skills	This competency is indexed
		by a tendency to be pleasant,
		cooperative, and helpful
		when working with others, as
		well as flexible in conflict
		resolution situations.
	Self-Control	This competency is
		characterized by the ability
		to: stay calm and collected
		when confronted with
		adversity, frustration, or
		other difficult situations; and
		avoid defensive reactions or
		hurt feelings as a result of
		others' comments.
	Energy	This competency is
		characterized by a preference
		to stay busy, active, and
		avoid inactive events or
		situations.
Selection 35-50 Minutes
Required	Business Leadership	Measures the candidate's	32
		thinking styles. High scorers
		are likely to have or learn
		good planning and
		organizing skills, be
		innovative, consider issues
		from multiple perspectives,
		and create strategies to build
		their business.
	Leadership	Measures the candidate's	35
	Motivation	desire for achievement,
		drive, initiative, energy
		level, willingness to take
		charge, and persistence.
		High scorers are likely to be
		highly motivated to succeed
		and to set challenging goals
		for themselves and others.
	Self-Leadership	Measures the candidate's	34
		ability to control emotions,
		act with integrity, take
		responsibility for actions,
		and tolerate stress. High
		scorers are also likely to
		have a positive attitude, be
		optimistic about the future,
		and demonstrate high levels
		of professionalism.
	Interpersonal	Measures the candidate's	41
	Leadership	interpersonal characteristics.
		High scorers are likely to
		persuade and influence
		others, gain commitment,
		and build effective
		interpersonal relationships.
		They also have potential to
		develop skills in the areas of
		employee relations,
		coaching, motivating, and
		leading a team.
	Decision	Measures the tendency to	10
	Making/Problem	efficiently and effectively
	Solving	use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the
		ability to solve complex
		problems, and make
		reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning. This
		competency is characterized
		by the ability to verbally
		explain complex information
		to others.

TABLE NINE
Managerial Solutions
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Screening 10-20 Minutes
Required	Management	Measures potential for	10
	Potential	managerial success across
		industry type and functional
		area. Scores on
		Management Potential are
		derived from candidates'
		responses to questions
		regarding academic and
		social background, and
		aspirations concerning work.
	Judgment	Measures potential for	10
		making good judgments
		about how to effectively
		respond to work situations.
		Scores on Judgment are
		derived from candidates'
		responses to questions
		regarding situations one
		would likely encounter as a
		manager/supervisor.
Optional	Self-Confidence	This component references:	10
		belief in one's own abilities
		and skills and a tendency to
		feel competent in several
		areas.
	Decision Making	Measures potential for
		success as a manager. This
		is done by having applicants'
		make judgments about the
		most effective decisions in
		specific work situations.
		Their potential is determined
		by comparing their response
		profiles to the profiles of
		successful managers.
Selection 20-35-50 Mins
Required	Business Leadership	Measures the candidate's	32
		thinking styles. High scorers
		are likely to have or learn
		good planning and
		organizing skills, be
		innovative, consider issues
		from multiple perspectives,
		and create strategies to build
		their business.
	Leadership	Measures the candidate's	35
	Motivation	desire for achievement,
		drive, initiative, energy
		level, willingness to take
		charge, and persistence.
		High scorers are likely to be
		highly motivated to succeed
		and to set challenging goals
		for themselves and others.
	Self-Leadership	Measures the candidate's	34
		ability to control emotions,
		act with integrity, take
		responsibility for actions,
		and tolerate stress. High
		scorers are also likely to
		have a positive attitude, be
		optimistic about the future,
		and demonstrate high levels
		of professionalism.
	Interpersonal	Measures the candidate's	41
	Leadership	interpersonal characteristics.
		High scorers are likely to
		persuade and influence
		others, gain commitment,
		and build effective
		interpersonal relationships.
		They also have potential to
		develop skills in the areas of
		employee relations,
		coaching, motivating, and
		leading a team.
Optional	Decision	Measures the tendency to	10
	Making/Problem	efficiently and effectively
	Solving	use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the
		ability to solve complex
		problems, and make
		reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning. This
		competency is characterized
		by the ability to verbally
		explain complex information
		to others.

TABLE TEN
Technical-Professional Solutions
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Screening 8 Minutes
Required	Dependability	This competency is	40
		characterized by: a
		willingness to behave in
		expected and agree upon
		ways; following through on
		assignments and
		commitments; keeping
		promises; and accepting the
		consequences of one's own
		actions.
	Interpersonal Skills	This competency is indexed
		by a tendency to be pleasant,
		cooperative, and helpful
		when working with others,
		as well as flexible in conflict
		resolution situations.
	Self-Control	This competency is
		characterized by the ability
		to: stay calm and collected
		when confronted with
		adversity, frustration, or
		other difficult situations; and
		avoid defensive reactions or
		hurt feelings as a result of
		others' comments.
	Energy	This competency is
		characterized by a
		preference to stay busy,
		active, and avoid inactive
		events or situations.
Selection 35-50 Minutes
Required	Business Leadership	Measures the candidate's	32
		thinking styles. High scorers
		are likely to have or learn
		good planning and
		organizing skills, be
		innovative, consider issues
		from multiple perspectives,
		and create strategies to build
		their business.
	Leadership	Measures the candidate's	35
	Motivation	desire for achievement,
		drive, initiative, energy
		level, willingness to take
		charge, and persistence.
		High scorers are likely to be
		highly motivated to succeed
		and to set challenging goals
		for themselves and others.
	Self-Leadership	Measures the candidate's	34
		ability to control emotions,
		act with integrity, take
		responsibility for actions,
		and tolerate stress. High
		scorers are also likely to
		have a positive attitude, be
		optimistic about the future,
		and demonstrate high levels
		of professionalism.
	Interpersonal	Measures the candidate's	41
	Leadership	interpersonal characteristics.
		High scorers are likely to
		persuade and influence
		others, gain commitment,
		and build effective
		interpersonal relationships.
		They also have potential to
		develop skills in the areas of
		employee relations,
		coaching, motivating, and
		leading a team.
	Decision	Measures the tendency to	10
	Making/Problem	efficiently and effectively
	Solving	use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the
		ability to solve complex
		problems, and make
		reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning and
		effectively use verbal
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the
		ability to verbally explain
		complex information to
		others.

TABLE ELEVEN
Executive Solutions
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Screening 20 Minutes
Required	Executive Potential	Measures the potential for	53
		success in high-level
		organizational positions
		across industry type and
		functional area. Scores on
		Executive Potential are
		derived from candidates'
		responses to questions
		regarding work background,
		accomplishments, and career
		aspirations.
Selection 35-50 Minutes
Required	Business Leadership	Measures the candidate's	32
		thinking styles. High scorers
		are likely to have or learn
		good planning and
		organizing skills, be
		innovative, consider issues
		from multiple perspectives,
		and create strategies to build
		their business.
	Leadership	Measures the candidate's	35
	Motivation	desire for achievement,
		drive, initiative, energy
		level, willingness to take
		charge, and persistence.
		High scorers are likely to be
		highly motivated to succeed
		and to set challenging goals
		for themselves and others.
	Self-Leadership	Measures the candidate's	34
		ability to control emotions,
		act with integrity, take
		responsibility for actions,
		and tolerate stress. High
		scorers are also likely to
		have a positive attitude, be
		optimistic about the future,
		and demonstrate high levels
		of professionalism.
	Interpersonal	Measures the candidate's	41
	Leadership	interpersonal characteristics.
		High scorers are likely to
		persuade and influence
		others, gain commitment,
		and build effective
		interpersonal relationships.
		They also have potential to
		develop skills in the areas of
		employee relations,
		coaching, motivating, and
		leading a team.
	Decision	Measures the tendency to	10
	Making/Problem	efficiently and effectively
	Solving	use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the
		ability to solve complex
		problems, and make
		reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning. This
		competency is characterized
		by the ability to verbally
		explain complex information
		to others.

TABLE TWELVE
Campus Recruiting Solutions
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Screening 12 Minutes
Required	Supervisory	Measures potential for	26
	Potential	supervisory success across
		industry type and functional
		area. Scores on Supervisory
		Potential are derived from
		candidates' responses to
		questions regarding
		academic and social
		background, and aspirations
		concerning work.
	Judgment	Measures potential for
		making good judgments
		about how to effectively
		respond to work situations.
		Scores on Judgment are
		derived from candidates'
		responses to questions
		regarding situations one
		would likely encounter as a
		manager/supervisor.
	Management	Measures potential for
	Potential	managerial success across
		industry type and functional
		area. Scores on
		Management Potential are
		derived from candidates'
		responses to questions
		regarding academic and
		social background, and
		aspirations concerning work.
Selection 20-35-50 Min
Required	Business Leadership	Measures the candidate's	32
		thinking styles. High scorers
		are likely to have or learn
		good planning and
		organizing skills, be
		innovative, consider issues
		from multiple perspectives,
		and create strategies to build
		their business.
	Leadership	Measures the candidate's	35
	Motivation	desire for achievement,
		drive, initiative, energy
		level, willingness to take
		charge, and persistence.
		High scorers are likely to be
		highly motivated to succeed
		and to set challenging goals
		for themselves and others.
	Self-Leadership	Measures the candidate's	34
		ability to control emotions,
		act with integrity, take
		responsibility for actions,
		and tolerate stress. High
		scorers are also likely to
		have a positive attitude, be
		optimistic about the future,
		and demonstrate high levels
		of professionalism.
	Interpersonal	Measures the candidate's	41
	Leadership	interpersonal characteristics.
		High scorers are likely to
		persuade and influence
		others, gain commitment,
		and build effective
		interpersonal relationships.
		They also have potential to
		develop skills in the area of
		employee relations,
		coaching, motivating, and
		leading a team.
Optional	Decision	Measures the tendency to	10
	Making/Problem	efficiently and effectively
	Solving	use numerical and analytical
		reasoning. This competency
		is characterized by the
		ability to solve complex
		problems, and make
		reasoned decisions.
Optional	Communication	Measures the tendency to	10
		efficiently and effectively
		use verbal reasoning. This
		competency is characterized
		by the ability to verbally
		explain complex information
		to others.

TABLE THIRTEEN
Communication Solution
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Selection 37 Minutes
Required	Listening	Measure of the tendency to	73
	Orientation	listen to and understand
		others' perspectives, to care
		for others, to accept and
		respect the individual
		differences of people, and to
		be open both to multiple
		ideas and to using alternative
		mode of thinking.
	English Language	Measures usage of verb
	Skills	tense and sentence
		construction. Scores on
		English Language Skills are
		derived from candidates
		responses to grammar
		questions.
	Verbal	Measures verbal reasoning
	Reasoning/Critical	skills and critical thinking/
	Thinking	reasoning skills. Scores on
		Verbal Reasoning Ability
		are derived from candidates'
		responses to analogies and
		questions about information
		provided in brief reading
		passages.

TABLE FOURTEEN
Series Six/Seven Success Solution
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Screening 36 Minutes
Required	Problem Solving	Measures the ability to	20
		analyze and evaluate
		information. Scores on
		Problem Solving are derived
		from candidates' responses
		to mathematical and
		analytical reasoning items,
		requiring candidates to
		response to facts and figures
		presented in various formats.
	Verbal	Measures verbal reasoning
	Reasoning/Critical	skills and critical
	Thinking	thinking/reasoning skills.
		Scores on Verbal Reasoning
		Ability are derived from
		candidates' responses to
		analogies and involves
		making inferences from
		information provided in the
		form of brief passages

TABLE FIFTEEN
Information Technology Aptitude Solution
	Solution Component	Definition	Items
Screening 18 Minutes
Required	Critical Thinking	Measure reasoning and	58
		critical thinking skills.
		Scores on Critical Thinking
		are derived from candidates'
		responses to information
		provided in the form of brief
		passages.
	Problem Solving	Measure the ability to
		analyze and evaluate
		information. Scores on
		Problem Solving are derived
		from candidates' responses
		to mathematical and
		analytical reasoning items,
		requiring candidates to
		respond to facts and figures
		presented in various
		scenarios.
	Communication	Measures the ability to
		efficiently use verbal
		information. Scores on
		Communication are derived
		from candidates' ability to
		identify synonyms.
	Spatial Ability	Measure the ability to
		visually manipulate objects.
		Scores on Spatial Ability are
		derived from candidates'
		ability to correctly identify
		the number of blocks in
		progressively difficult
		figures.

Although the disclosure has focused on recruiting applications, the generated data may be used in other human capital applications. FIG. 13 illustrates a human capital management life-cycle. Measurement and data 1301 is initially used in the context of recruiting 1302. For recruiting 1302, screening, selection, and interview solutions measure applicants' competencies and predict on-the-job performance and thus contribution to business outcomes.

For compensation 1303, data about potential can be weighed against performance data to ensure that high potential employees who are on difficult assignments where they are structurally constrained from succeeding are not underpaid by pure focus on performance. For example, structural constraints may include business environments, poor staff, unreliable equipment, etc.

For retention 1304, businesses with jobs that high turnover use the system to ensure that applicants have qualities that contribute to longer tenure in roles.

For performance role 1305, the system van be used to enhance the validity of employee performance evaluation.

For training and development 1306, a company may test current employees in order to design executive training programs addressing each individual's strengths and weaknesses. Or, for employees that took a test and were hired despite weaknesses, the data can be used to structure appropriate training.

For succession 1307, data on employees may be collected in the process of organization mergers to assist planning for retrenchment or change. Also, by measuring competencies and mapping them between roles, it is possible to assess the potential that an individual may have for a role other than the job they are currently holding, such as for a promotion or a transfer to another area.

The foregoing description is to be considered as illustrative only. The skilled artisan will recognize many variations and permutations within the spirit of the disclosure.

Claims

1. An apparatus for assisting in determining the suitability of an individual for employment by an employer, the apparatus comprising:

an electronic data interrogator configured to present a first set of a plurality of questions to the individual;

an electronic answer capturer configured to electronically store the individual's responses to at least a selected plurality of the first set of questions presented to the individual;

an electronic predictor responsive to the stored answers and configured to predict at least one post-hire outcome for at least one job performance criterion if the individual were to be employed by the employer, the predictor providing a prediction of the at least one post-hire outcome for the at least one job performance criterion based upon correlations of the stored answers with answers to sets of questions by other individuals for which post-hire information has been collected; and

an electronic results provider providing an output indicative of the prediction of the at least one post-hire outcome for the at least one job performance criterion to assist in determining the suitability of the individual for employment by the employer; wherein the electronic results provider is configured to provide a hiring recommendation based at least on the at least one post-hire outcome for the at least one job performance criterion; wherein the electronic results provider is further configured to determine a score for the individual, further configured to determine whether the score is over a threshold, and further configured to identify the individual as a favorable candidate if the score is over the threshold.

2. An apparatus according to claim 1 wherein at least one of the predicted outcomes is a predicted ranking of the individual for the outcome.

3. An apparatus according to claim 1 wherein the data interrogator is located at a first location and the predictor is located at a second location which is remote from the first location.

4. An apparatus according to claim 3 wherein the data interrogator and the predictor are selectively electronically interconnected through a network.

5. An apparatus according to claim 4 wherein the network is the worldwide web.

6. An apparatus according to claim 4 wherein the network is a telephone network.

7. An apparatus according to claim 1 wherein the first set of questions may be varied.

8. An apparatus according to claim 7 wherein the predictor is configured to determine and indicate a lack of a correlation between one or more questions of the first set of questions and at least one of the predicted outcomes, whereby questions which lack the correlation may be discarded or modified.

9. An apparatus according to claim 1 wherein at least one of the predicted outcomes is longevity with an employer and the answers to sets of questions by other individuals comprise answers by employees of the employer for whom longevity has been determined.

10. An apparatus according to claim 1 in which the predictor comprises at least one model which provides a predictor of the probability of the individual exhibiting at least one of the predicted outcomes, the model being based on correlations between the at least one of the predicted outcomes and the answers to questions by the other individuals, including answers by at least some employees of the employer, the model taking at least selected answers of the stored answers as inputs to the model, a probability of the individual exhibiting the at least one of the predicted outcomes being provided as an output of the model.

11. An apparatus according to claim 1 wherein the predictor is responsive to the stored answers and configured to predict plural outcomes if the individual were to be employed by the employer.

12. An apparatus for assisting in determining the suitability of an individual for employment by an employer, the apparatus comprising:

means for electronically presenting a first set of a plurality of questions to the individual;

means for electronically storing the individual's responses to at least a selected plurality of the first set of questions presented to the individual;

responsive to the stored answers, means for predicting at least one post-hire outcome for at least one job performance criterion if the individual were to be employed by the employer, the means for predicting providing a prediction of the at least one post-hire outcome for the at least one job performance criterion based upon correlations of the at least one characteristic with answers to sets of questions by other individuals and the closeness of the stored answers to such correlations;

means for determining a score for the individual based at least on the prediction of the at least one post-hire outcome for the at least one job performance criterion;

means for determining whether the score meets a threshold; and

means for providing an output indicative of the at least one post-hire outcome for the at least one job performance criterion and whether the score meets the threshold to assist in determining the suitability of the individual for employment by the employer.

13. A computer-readable medium having a collection of employment-related data, the data comprising:

pre-hire information for a plurality of employees, wherein the pre-hire information comprises information electronically-collected from an applicant, wherein the information comprises a plurality of pre-hire characteristics;

post-hire information for at least some of the plurality of employees, wherein the information comprises a plurality of post-hire outcomes;

a data structure identifying which of the pre-hire characteristics are effective in predicting a set of one or more of the post-hire outcomes for at least one job performance criterion for a job applicant;

a set of scores for candidate employees, wherein the scores are generated via the set of one or more of the post-hire outcomes; and

an indication of which of the scores for the candidate employees are over a threshold.

14. An apparatus for assisting in determining the suitability of an individual for employment by an employer, the apparatus comprising:

an applicant terminal configured to present a first set of a plurality of questions to the individual;

an applicant screening server configured to electronically store the individual's responses to at least a selected plurality of the first set of questions presented to the individual;

an electronic predictor system responsive to the stored answers and configured to predict at least one business outcome for at least one job performance criterion if the individual were to be employed by the employer, the electronic predictor system providing a prediction of the at least one business outcome for the at least one job performance criterion based upon correlations of the stored answers with answers to sets of questions by other individuals for which post-hire information has been collected; and

a viewing system providing an output indicative of the prediction of the at least one business outcome for the at least one job performance criterion to assist in determining the suitability of the individual for employment by the employer; wherein the viewing system is configured to provide a hiring recommendation based at least on the at least one business outcome for the at least one job performance criterion;

wherein the viewing system is further configured to determine a score for the individual, further configured to determine whether the score is over a norm, and further configured to identify the individual as a favorable candidate if the score is over the norm.

15. An apparatus according to claim 14 wherein at least one of the business outcomes is a predicted ranking of the individual for the outcome.

16. An apparatus according to claim 14 wherein the applicant terminals are located at a first location and the electronic predictor system is located at a second location which is remote from the first location.

17. An apparatus according to claim 16 wherein the applicant terminals and the electronic predictor system are selectively electronically interconnected through a network.

18. An apparatus according to claim 17 wherein the network is the worldwide web.

19. An apparatus according to claim 17 wherein the network is a telephone network.

20. An apparatus according to claim 14 wherein the first set of questions may be varied.

21. An apparatus according to claim 20 wherein the electronic predictor system is configured to determine and indicate a lack of correlation between one or more questions of the first set of questions and at least one of the business outcomes, whereby questions which lack the correlation may be discarded or modified.

22. An apparatus according to claim 14 wherein at least one of the business outcomes is tenure of employment and the answers to sets of questions by other individuals comprise answers by employees of the employer for whom tenure of employment has been determined.

23. An apparatus according to claim 14 in which the electronic predictor system provides a prediction of the probability of the individual exhibiting at least one of the business outcomes, the prediction being based on correlations between the at least one of the business outcomes and the answers to questions by the other individuals, including answers by at least some employees of the employer, the prediction taking at least selected answers of the stored answers as inputs to the prediction, a probability of the individual exhibiting at least one of the business outcomes being provided as an output of the prediction.

24. An apparatus according to claim 14 wherein the electronic predictor system is responsive to the stored answers and configured to predict plural business outcomes if the individual were to be employed by the employer.

25. An apparatus for assisting in determining the suitability of an individual for employment by an employer, the apparatus comprising:

means for electronically presenting a first set of a plurality of questions to the individual;

means for electronically storing responses of the individual to at least a selected plurality of the first set of questions presented to the individual;

means for predicting at least one business outcome for at least one job performance criterion if the individual were to be employed by the employer that is responsive to means for electronically storing responses of the individual, the means for predicting being configured to provide a prediction of at least one business outcome for the at least one job performance criterion based upon correlations of the at least one criterion with answers to sets of questions by other individuals and the closeness of the stored answers to such correlations;

means for determining a score for the individual based at least on the prediction of the at least one business outcome for the at least one job performance criterion;

means for determining whether the score meets a norm; and

means for providing an output indicative of the at least one business outcome for the at least one job performance criterion and whether the score meets the norm to assist in determining the suitability of the individual for employment by the employer.

26. A computer-readable medium having a collection of employment-related data, the data comprising:

pre-hire information for a plurality of employees, wherein the pre-hire information comprises information electronically-collected from an applicant, wherein the information comprises a plurality of competencies;

post-hire information for at least some of the plurality of employees, wherein the information comprises a plurality of business outcomes;

a feedback process identifying which of the competencies are effective in predicting a set of one or more of the business outcomes for at least one job performance criterion for a job applicant;

a set of scores for candidate employees, wherein the scores are generated via the set of one or more of the business outcomes; and

an indication of which of the scores for the candidate employees are over a norm.

27. An apparatus for assisting in determining the suitability of an individual for employment by an employer, the apparatus comprising:

an electronic data interrogator operable to present a first set of a plurality of questions to the individual;

an electronic answer capturer operable to electronically store the individual's responses to at least a selected plurality of the first set of questions presented to the individual;

an electronic predictor responsive to the stored answers and operable to predict at least one post-hire outcome if the individual were to be employed by the employer, the predictor providing a prediction of the outcome based upon correlations of the stored answers with answers to sets of questions by other individuals for which post-hire information has been collected; and

an electronic results provider providing an output indicative of the outcome to assist in determining the suitability of the individual for employment by the employer.

28. An apparatus according to claim 27, wherein at least one of the predicted outcomes is a predicted ranking of the individual for the outcome.

29. An apparatus according to claim 27, wherein the data interrogator is located at a first location and the predictor is located at a second location which is remote from the first location.

30. An apparatus according to claim 29, wherein the data interrogator and the predictor are selectively electronically interconnected through a network.

31. An apparatus according to claim 30, wherein the network is the worldwide web.

32. An apparatus according to claim 30, wherein the network is a telephone network.

33. An apparatus according to claim 27, wherein the first set of questions may be varied.

34. An apparatus according to claim 33, wherein the predictor is operable to determine and indicate a lack of correlation between one or more questions of the first set of questions and at least one of the predicted outcomes, whereby questions which lack the correlation may be discarded or modified.

35. An apparatus according to claim 27, wherein at least one of the predicted outcomes is longevity with an employer and the answers to sets of questions by other individuals comprise answers by employees of the employer for whom longevity has been determined.

36. An apparatus according to claim 27, in which the predictor comprises at least one model which provides a predictor of the probability of the individual exhibiting at least one of the predicted outcomes, the model being based on correlations between the at least one of the predicted outcomes and the answers to questions by the other individuals, including answers by at least some employees of the employer, the model taking at least selected answers of the stored answers as inputs to the model, a probability of the individual exhibiting the at least one of the predicted outcomes being provided as an output of the model.

37. An apparatus according to claim 27 wherein the predictor is responsive to the stored answers and operable to predict plural outcomes if the individual were to be employed by the employer.

38. An apparatus for assisting in determining the suitability of an individual for employment by an employer, the apparatus comprising:

means for electronically presenting a first set of a plurality of questions to the individual;

means for electronically storing the individual's responses to at least a selected plurality of the first set of questions presented to the individual;

responsive to the stored answers, means for predicting at least one post-hire outcome if the individual were to be employed by the employer, the means for predicting providing a prediction of the outcome based upon correlations of at least one characteristic with answers to sets of questions by other individuals and the closeness of the stored answers to such correlations; and

means for providing an output indicative of the outcome to assist in determining the suitability of the individual for employment by the employer.

39. A computer-readable medium having a collection of employment-related data, the data comprising:

pre-hire information for a plurality of employees, wherein the pre-hire information comprises information electronically-collected from an applicant, wherein the information comprises a plurality of pre-hire characteristics;

post-hire information for at least some of the plurality of employees, wherein the information comprises a plurality of post-hire outcomes; and

a data structure identifying which of the pre-hire characteristics are effective in predicting a set of one or more of the post-hire outcomes for a job applicant.