|
VALIDATIONS
 The PEAC SYSTEM® was initially validated in the intangible world of Personnel Services, primarily because hands down, it is the toughest arena to conduct business, the epitome of the 'consultative sell.' Without a product to help sell itself, or, too, a face to face, press the flesh opportunity, it is pretty much
what you say,
when you say it, and
how you say it that makes all the difference between the losers and the winners.
Although, historically, salespeople
from the personnel services world, if successful there, can usually sell in any other arena, it is untrue that successful product salespeople, or even certain intangible salespeople like insurance, and even (sort of) real estate agents, do well at all in the Personnel Services world. They leave, by the thousands, complaining lack of controls, lack of product, or stiff resistance to the high ticket.
However, initially, we focused on proving the communication style was accurate, and satisfied EEOC and just about all comers, that we can indeed predict personality and style, and, even more important to the concept of accuracy, also predict when someone has attempted to 'enhance' the responses to bend the results. With the help of the University of California at Berkeley we identified words that had consistent meaning to those with high school diplomas or above, and then mass evaluated hundreds of on-campus students, with an eye to making sure we were identifying the proper traits.
Subsequently, we took the evaluation to the Personnel Services arena, measuring anyone who may have had even a brief stint in the trenches, including those up to ten years. Based on production and tenure (first year figures) we gathered enough information for a huge database.
| |
This information was then graphed out to represent the standard normative (bell) curve, and one certain, obvious profile
appeared representing the highest score, obtained from tenure and production
combinations. Lesser scores were databased for other profiles.
That profile is the
one to seven your reader will talk about. Other profiles are in there, too, and are scored accordingly. Through this apparent confusion, the non-subjective logic of the computer keeps the results pure and develops the PEAC SCORE© .
Statistics for our 'dynamic database' now have us refined to within 3% either side of the score for "success rates." One misconception that stands out is the thought that high scorers should be 'high' producers. So, what is 'high?' In many companies, the culture prevents $200k billers, while in others, less than $100k will be unacceptable. As a percentage game, the confidence one places in the score is much like what was discussed on one of our previous NEWSPEAC©s: hire one hundred people with 60 scores, and you should only lose forty! Management style, content, patience, market conditions, personal problems, team problems, and God-knows- what-else, all conspire to defeat (or, sometimes, enhance) that score!
Now, with twelve plus years, nearly a hundred thousand dollars in research and development, we have reached a point where our predictive ability is very close. Hundreds of times, the manager hired in the face of the negative aspects because he or she 'liked' the candidate enough to give him or her a try, and then called to say, "Well, what do you know, folks? Everything you said he'd do? He did!" And, unless the manager was prepared to put in the time and money to fix the problem, the candidate walked.
More turnover. Ouch, indeed!
|
