PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10252780

Voluntary certification and the uniform guidelines on selection procedures: a potential problem for personnel managers.

Abstract

Employers in health care sometimes rely upon various standardized testing procedures in selecting, promoting, and training personnel. Within the health professions, voluntary certification programs have developed to permit individuals to demonstrate competence and become recognized as qualified practitioners. This article addresses the problems which can occur, but are not widely recognized, when employers use voluntary certification examinations in the selection process. The impact of the federal government's "Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures" upon voluntary certification activities is uncertain at best, and frightening, at worst. While the Guidelines require employers to use only validated examinations where adverse impact upon protected minority groups exists, they do not effectively address the use of professional certifying examinations and fail to provide guidance for either certifying agencies or employers. This leaves great potential for conflict, since circumstances in which employment is terminated, an employee denied promotion, or even denied opportunities for entry into positions based on an employer's use of voluntary certifying examinations, are increasing daily. How does an employer validate a national certifying examination that he does not administer? How does the certifying agency protect itself from allegations of discrimination or anti-trust violations based on actions of an employer with whom the agency has no contact? This article offers no answers to these troublesome questions. However, it may help eliminate another problem noted by the author--widespread ignorance of the seriousness of these circumstances for employers and certifying agencies. From first-hand experience and research into the development of the Uniform Guidelines, the author points out many of the difficulties which await those who rely on non-validated examinations or choose to ignore the government's edict that examinations used in selection must have a demonstrated relationship to the job. Finally, the article proposes solutions to the dilemma faced by certifying organizations and suggests that, by becoming more aware of the Uniform Guidelines, employers and testing groups have the opportunity to protect themselves before a problem occurs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S K Bryant. 1981. Voluntary certification and the uniform guidelines on selection procedures: a potential problem for personnel managers.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-2281(81)90012-6

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts.

INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to determine whether the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO OGS) can be assessed accurately from digital dental casts and whether there are statistical differences between digital and plaster dental casts in scoring the ABO OGS. METHODS: Thirty posttreatment plaster dental casts were selected and scanned by OrthoCAD (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ) to produce 30 corresponding digital dental casts. The plaster and digital casts were compared by using the criteria of the ABO OGS. Because the data were ordinal, a nonparametic statistical analysis was used. RESULTS: The Wilcoxon test for paired samples showed significant differences between the plaster and digital casts for occlusal contacts, occlusal relationships, and total scores (P <.05). No significant differences were found for alignment, marginal ridges, overjet, and interproximal contacts. Buccolingual inclination was not included in this study because of inability to perform proper measurements with the OrthoCAD program. Mean differences of points deducted ranged from .03 point for marginal ridges to 5.07 points for the total score. The variable with the most points deducted related to occlusal relationships, and the fewest points were deducted for interproximal contacts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, the current OrthoCAD program (version 2.2) was not adequate for scoring all parameters as required by the ABO OGS.

Certification↗