Phase I: Completing the Validation Study
In the first part of the study, officers completed the 16pf Questionnaire which provided an understanding of the group’s personality. The second part of the study focused on collecting performance data on the officers from their direct managers.
We conducted a validation study using the organization’s current armed officers in order to:
- Demonstrate that the public safety dimensions were linked to good performance for their officers
- Determine cutoff scores for use in future hiring
With both sets of data collected, our analysts began the process of determining which of the 16pf PSR Dimensions were indicative of good performance, and to what degree. Overall, the organization’s armed officers looked very similar to other protective service occupations. The officers displayed average scores on both Intellectual Efficiency and Interpersonal Relations, while having high average scores on both Emotional Adjustment and Integrity/Control. This is a very common pattern of scores for those working in high-risk occupations where coping skills and dependability are essential.
Next, the armed officers’ public safety dimension scores were analyzed to determine which of the scores were predictive of performance in the position. The performance measure used was tailored for the organization and included ratings on Job Knowledge, Stress Tolerance, Use of Force, and Team Orientation, among others. The dimensions showed the expected trend of a positive relationship with the performance dimensions.
Committed to providing ongoing superior service to clients, the security organization recognized the need for a selection tool that was both scientifically proven to predict security officer performance and aligned with industry best practices. Our 16pf PSR met the security organization’s high standards and expectations.
Finally, the public safety dimension scores were examined for any potential adverse impact within the armed security officer sample gathered from the organization. The dimension scores were compared across the different racial categories and no differences were found to exist.
As an extension of the adverse impact analyses, the public safety dimensions were examined for potential differences within the gender categories. The organization also requested that the dimensions be examined for any potential age differences, specifically for those younger than 40 as well as those older than 40. There were no interpretable differences among these protected groups, strengthening the case for the 16pf PSR as a viable and legal selection measure for armed security officers within this private security organization.