Avoiding Misassessment of capability in employment: Difference between revisions
PeteTyerman (talk | contribs) (Created page with " == Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Employment == This page explains how uneven cognitive profiles can lead to misjudgement of capability in recruitment, appraisal, performance management, and capability procedures when assessment processes focus on how work is performed rather than what the role actually requires. In employment settings, visible difficulties are often those associated with processing speed, organisation, working memory, or communication style....") |
PeteTyerman (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity]] | |||
== Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Employment == | == Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Employment == | ||
| Line 30: | Line 32: | ||
[[Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity]] | [[Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity]] | ||
[[Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Education]] | [[Avoiding Misassessment of capability in education|Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Education]] | ||
[[Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Settings]] | [[Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Settings]] | ||
Latest revision as of 11:14, 10 February 2026
Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity
Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Employment
This page explains how uneven cognitive profiles can lead to misjudgement of capability in recruitment, appraisal, performance management, and capability procedures when assessment processes focus on how work is performed rather than what the role actually requires.
In employment settings, visible difficulties are often those associated with processing speed, organisation, working memory, or communication style. Less visible are strengths in reasoning, judgement, pattern recognition, or specialist problem-solving. Where assessment prioritises surface performance, constrained domains may be mistaken for lack of competence.
Key points
Interview performance does not reliably predict job performance where cognitive profiles are uneven.
Difficulties with organisation, speed, or fluency may mask high-level professional capability.
Assessment processes often measure compatibility with process demands rather than effectiveness in role.
Reasonable adjustments protect decision integrity by ensuring capability is assessed accurately.
Recruitment and performance assessment
Recruitment and appraisal processes frequently rely on time-limited interviews, rapid responses, or unstructured interaction. These formats can suppress substantive capability in individuals whose strengths are reasoning-based rather than process-based.
Where constraints are incidental to the role, assessment outcomes may be distorted and unreliable.
Adjustments as decision integrity
Adjustments are not preferential treatment. They remove irrelevant barriers so that assessment measures job-relevant capability rather than artefacts of the assessment process itself.
Failure to adjust risks excluding capable individuals and undermining the validity of employment decisions.
How this links to uneven cognitive profiles
In uneven cognitive profiles, constraint-dominant domains disproportionately shape observable performance. Without recognising this structure, employers may judge capability on the basis of the most constrained domain rather than the most relevant one.
Related pages
Uneven Cognitive Profiles and Assessment Validity
Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Education
Avoiding Misassessment of Capability in Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Settings
