Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
LEAD Project Evaluation (Content / Methodology (Exercises - Strong, well…
LEAD Project Evaluation
Content / Methodology
Exercises - Strong, well built exercises bringing out competencies well.
Self awareness and Customer focus rather hardly observable. (in the team exercise)
Also introverts had a possibility to show their competence during the 2nd, 3rd exercises
--The way of forming the exercise needs to clearly defined to expectation perspectives. Testing is important but it reflects to our culture.
I believe we were able to appropriately identify the strongest candidates aligned to the desired competency model
Prep session for Assessors - well built, useful, drawing attention to all necessary bias-points
Competencies are reflecting new Strategy, new culture - forcing assessors to reflect on MOL internal processes and behaviours shown as well
-
Calibrations are managed in a straighforward manner based on points and conclusions in the end of the days
Additional calibration is needed as a final wrapup and calibration of all the results for boths streams also considering Growing participants who might be recommended for Emerging
!!!--Trend analysis after the AC is needed (not just calibration), for example: last years' participants, performance of candidates who were pushed-in, infos of NEXT participants, etc.
!!!-Regarding to the methology, AC preparation could be held earlier, twice a year if we want to use AC as a tool (could be AC pool creation as well) or make a short and simple tutorial video.
-Final table could be set up like:
Potential: NO - YES - NO
AC: NO - NO - YES
With this setup it could be easier to understand and explain.
-
!!!--In the follow up process, setting the personal development plan for those who didn't qualify for the programme will be a really complex and hard task to do but in my view the countries are not clear with it. (I would follow up with the participants in the satisfaction survey when they already have their IDP then we can check immediately if the countries are doing it.
7 candidates are too much for one day even if they are split to 2 teams for the presentation exercise; 6 can be a good solution
-
Assessors / Assessment
Scale is not always consistantly used by the assessors, occasionally reaching back to definitions
--Rephrasing definitions(?)
Some assessors tend to rate based on the main principles or the as-is (old) culture.
Some cases assessors play hard by rating always more strict than others to show power
Most cases assessory can be kept on track by moderators
Integrate into the prep session that please make sure you do not use rating as positioning
Time keeping improved quite a lot since last year. Some cases 10-20 mins delay emerged due to conflicting arguments on particpants, though no major delays.
Overall there a bit too many assessors on the AC which puts tension on the nominees. This is great opportunity to train managers on assessing, though might be more efficient to either split assessors for the last exercise of the AC or to cut number of assessors after the 1st team exercise.
--Assessors' number should be maximised in 8 but rather 7.
Moderation is efficient, holding onto the main rules of observation regarding biases, assumptions and any potential judgements.
Possibility of what can be handled by the program as development area arise as an additional aspect from the schools.
-Bit more comprehensive notes on EGL (on GGL during the evaluation, Hans wrote down all the notes which gave us more complex input for the feedback). On EGL there were only half-sentences and some words, actually on the spot.
--Final conclusions should be put in a form per competencies which could be seen at the end. Better to have special comments per competencies which we can reflect on later.
-More understanding from the beginning for assessors when this program fits into individual development. That's fine we have Dave and Cotrugli there but lets make that clear who will need it actually. Well most of them don't really know the program and curricula either and mostly they would like to use it as a reward because they don't have any other idea.
--More detailed information is needed, what is inculed in the program. Make sure it will be undesrtood through the briefing and LEAD is not the only solution.
Assessors were well prepared - even if they didn't take part on the prep. session, they went through the materials before the AC
Assessment was well calibrated by moderators and assessors from the business schools + additional calibration meeting was useful to have a final decision on the whole pool
-
Logistics
-
Timetable is quite packed for both Assessees and assessors, though managed well by coordinators and assessors
Fingerfood shall contain salad options with more meat and chese, beans and substancial sandwiches to ensure content that lasts till the end of the day - was best in Grand hotel
Grand Hotel and Thermal had heating issues - this shall be checked before in case we are in the change season
Information well received before and on spot as well, all assessors and participants arrived to the event on time, additional support was ensured to guide ppl between the 2 hotels on teh 2nd week (Grand and Thermal)
Follow up - organization of invitations and prep for webexes worked very well, good to connect IT and ext consultants directly
-
Great status table, to be used as sample
Participants
Generally a bit less strong participants then 2 years ago in both stream.
Emerging - there were more outstanding performances as well
Growing - In general less senior nominations, not mature enough for Growing level - some has also been suggested to be involved in Emerging
Waiting time is difficult to handle - more task could be introduced (writing) or the split to 2 teams could be a solution in the afternoons.
Overall 2 participants withdrawn - Familiy issues, Overload
-More informal talk to participants as they have lot of questions, not necessarily about the AC. Good platform to act as partners (L&D partners), advice and promote our products.
-
For some of the participants using English was an issue - in which way can be language knowledge tested? - verbal to be tested as well, mayxbe by HR colleagues