Renee V. McConnell and John W. Seybolt

Surveys of business school students, graduates, and faculty members, as well as employers have resulted in remarkable agreement on the following points: (1) the management curriculum represents an opportunity for students to gain skills in technical competence as well as skills for more effective management of people; (2) students expect to acquire "real world" skills; and (3) prospective employers place high importance on students' acquiring management, leadership and other interpersonal skills (Benson, 1983; Porter & McKibbin, 1988; Whetten & Cameron, 1983). Yet, as described by Porter and McKibbin (1988), the management curriculum often falls short in providing these skills, particularly in the balance between technical and behavioral skills. In fact, one of the conclusions of this chapter is that we pay insufficient attention to the actual processes of managing people and the development of leadership skills. An implication is that there can be some question as to the relevance of the training which our business schools offer their students in terms of the specific managerial work which they will perform in the decades ahead (O'Malley, 1989).

Most business school programs attempt to "teach" students to improve their management skills. Most often, however, this teaching appears almost exclusively as information about these skills. In general, professors use selected readings, class discussions, group projects and written exams, but frequently do not distinguish between knowing the content (the "what") and the process (the "how") of management. This means that most business schools have not adequately emphasized the individual "output" aspects of learning relevant skills. Management curricula have too often avoided the demonstration and evaluation of specific management skills through structured activities that could reveal behaviorally observable, value added components. What has been especially absent even in the experiential focus of many organizational behavior classes has been evaluations of students as they demonstrate these skills and feedback regarding their developmental needs.

The purpose of this chapter is to present examples of one approach to assessing management behaviors in business schools, discussing three different ways for integrating action skills at the undergraduate, MBA and Executive MBA levels. To address the critical issue of modes for evaluating individuals' demonstrations of these skills, each of these applications offered specific feedback regarding demonstrated strengths and weaknesses, as well as recommendations for further skill development. Management faculty members wanting to emphasize the development of management action skills can integrate a skills track in some part of their curricular offerings by applying these three options or variations of them.

A large body of literature addresses how to assess managerial skills and talents (Dunnette, 1971; Grant, Katkovsky & Bray, 1967; Hinrichs, 1969; Taft, 1959). Much of this literature focuses on the development and testing of the managerial assessment center technology, where individuals are assessed by various methods for their level of skills in numerous managerial situations (Bray & Grant, 1966; Finkle, 1976; Jaffee & Frank, 1978; Moses, 1977; Wollowick & McNamara, 1969). While this technology has been quite well documented as an effective method not only for assessing skill level, but also for enhancing the performance of both those who are assessed and those who are assessors, there has been limited cross-over and use of this assessment center technology in business schools (Moses & Byham, 1976). One notable exception is a required course in Management Assessment/Development at the Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve University which serves as the basis for developing competency-based educational plans for incoming MBA students (Business Week, October 30, 1989). Yet this is truly the exception and most business schools have not adopted competency based learning approaches.

One reason for this absence may be the extremely high labor intensity and associated labor costs which assessment center technology requires (Cohen, 1980; Howard, 1974). Typical classroom situations make it extremely difficult to incorporate this technology since it requires a high level of individualized observation and consultation. In addition, since assessment center technology was developed in industry and the world of training and development, some may see it as more of a training activity than an educational activity, and consequently somewhat outside the domain of more traditional business school curricula (Byham, 1982; Hart & Thompson, 1979). Nonetheless, the assessment center model can be particularly effective in assessing action skills in today's business school environment.

This chapter will discuss examples of such use: (1) an undergraduate leadership course focusing on teaching leadership skills and models through lectures, readings and assessment simulations; (2) a pilot communication competence program using an assessment center model to preassess, train and post-assess MBA students on skills in the areas of oral, interpersonal and written communication; and (3) an Executive MBA skill assessment with students participating in a traditional one-day assessment center.

A quarter-long undergraduate course in leadership focused on learning leadership skills through participation in assessment exercises. The instructor spent two of the four hours each week discussing leadership theories, models and applications. During this time, the instructor would define behaviors that signify high levels of effectiveness in relation to the particular skill. Ten managerial action skills were singled out for inclusion in this assessment program. Those ten skills were: planning, analysis, decision-making, influence, verbal communication, sensitivity, organizing, delegation, management control and written communication. For each skill, operational definitions were developed, upon which assessments of the students' skills could then be based. For example, the skill decision-making was operationally defined as: Coming to decisions systematically, by clearly defining a problem, exploring alternative solutions, choosing the best alternative, and making a definite and specific choice as to which course of action to take. This dimension focuses on the process used to make decisions, as well as the judgment employed in choosing one alternative over another. A person demonstrating this skill will have enacted the following behaviors:

* Clearly stated what the problems were.

* Described "what is happening now" and "what should be happening" when discussing the problem.

* Avoided quick or impulsive decisions.

* Suggested that criteria be established for making the decision.

* Chose the most logical solution based on the facts suggested.

* Stated the solutions chosen in definite terms.

* Explained the rationale behind the solution he or she supported.

From these operationalizations of the specific managerial skills, checklists were developed which could then be used to observe and document the students' behaviors.

Class discussions included real world examples at both supervisory and nonsupervisory levels illustrating the difference between effective and ineffective managerial behaviors and the consequences of each. In addition, leadership theories were discussed to illustrate why the skill dimensions which had been selected were relevant. The other weekly two-hour class was spent in typical assessment exercises which were designed to elicit the ten targeted skills. These exercises were adapted from assessment center exercises developed for managers in several work organizations in both the public and private sector. The assessment activities included the following: A problem solving task force, a meeting with a problem subordinate, conflict with a superior, an inbasket, a leaderless group discussion and a presentation to the board. Each exercise was conducted on a different week of the quarter, enabling students to demonstrate improvement in the various skills which were assessed during each of the exercises.

Individual assessment and written feedback regarding skill level was provided by the instructor and the three PhD student assessors who had been previously trained in the assessment center process. Information regarding the presence or absence of certain behaviors as well overall patterns of recurring behaviors were noted. Students were rated on a five point scale (1=needing much development, 5=exceptional skills). Comparisons were made between assessment ratings received early in the quarter with those in the final weeks of the course. Student self-reports at the conclusion of the course indicated a high level of both learning and satisfaction. Not only did the undergraduates have the "input" of leadership theory, but they could demonstrate a high level of "output" as evidenced in the assessment exercises.

A communication skills program for MBA students was developed outside the regular course curriculum to address the development of skills in three areas of communication: interpersonal, oral and written. Experiences designed for these three areas were spread over two quarters and scheduled in three hour segments. Eighteen students participated in the program.

Like the undergraduate leadership class, this program used assessment center technology. Three instructors designed experiences assessing these communication skills. Operational definitions of the concepts guided the assessment activities. For example, interpersonal communication competence was defined as skill in active listening, feedback and "I messages", congruent nonverbal behaviors, problem-solving skills and behavioral flexibility. The operational definition of written communication competence included such skills as reader analysis, message formats, organization, tone and style, and mechanics of writing. The operational definition of oral communication competence included verbal and nonverbal delivery skills, audience analysis, organization, reasoning and choice of language. Research suggests that these skills are valued by both prospective employers as well as students who have recently graduated from business schools (Andrews & Sigband, 1984; Curtis, Winsor & Stephens, 1989)

Each of these skills was broken down into observable behaviors which, when demonstrated with frequency and effectiveness, was construed as evidence of competence. For example, a person demonstrating the skill of appropriate nonverbal behaviors would have enacted the following specific behaviors in oral delivery: used appropriate pace; used appropriate volume level, demonstrated conviction through vocal enthusiasm, established eye contact, and used natural gestures.

Once the nature of the communication skills was determined, the instructors developed the three learning modules. Commonality among the three modules included: 15-18 hours of skill learning time, micro lectures, skill-oriented reading packets, videotaped or computer recorded assessment activities, instructor modeling of appropriate behaviors, and one-on-one developmental feedback regarding competence in assessment activities.

Pre-assessment and post-assessment exercises were designed to assess the value-added impact of learning in the interpersonal, oral and written communication modules. Using a four point scale (1 = needs much development to 4 = superior), the students were rated on how well they communicated in a videotaped interaction between a manager and his/her subordinate, a videotaped oral presentation, and a computer developed memo. Parallel exercises were used for the purposes of pre- and post-training ratings. Mean instructor ratings of these students were:

interpersonal communication, pre=1.30, post 3.05;

oral presentations, pre=1.59, post=3.08;

written communication, pre=2.74 and post=3.53.

Although these instructor ratings appear somewhat global, they were drawn from specific behavioral assessor rating forms. These forms listed well defined behaviors targeted for identification, similar to the nonverbal behaviors described earlier. These forms also enhanced student and teacher awareness of skill deficiency. With these forms in hand, one-on-one feedback was given to review the assessment activity, ie., the videotaped interpersonal and oral communication exercises and the written communication memo--prior to each communication module. This suggested to the students where they should concentrate their efforts in making certain behavioral changes. Learning of the action skills was further facilitated during the modules by frequent reference to "doing" or "showing" the skills as they were defined behaviorally on the rating forms. Finally, the rating forms became a springboard for reviewing strategies for further development of communication skills, particularly for those behaviors in which post assessment ratings were weak.

Student responses to this extracurricular communication program were positive. On an eight point rating scale (1 = poor; 8 = excellent) mean student ratings were 7.4. Some illustrative student comments were: "It was super to have such intensive, one-on-one help, teaching and feedback;" "I liked the informal atmosphere where participation was encouraged;" "The instructors really seemed to care, making it an enjoyable, nonthreatening experience, unlike most other MBA courses." These students also described the content of the communication program to be relevant and the targeted performance achievable, eg., "I have never learned this type of material before and it is relevant to all aspects of life;" "Actually practicing the skills was the best aspect of the program;" "This program is so important to our career success that it should be required of all MBA students." The program appeared relevant to traditional American students, as well as to international students. One of the two foreign students in the program stated, "I've appreciated this chance to improve my communication skills and to understand American culture better. Thank you very much."

Based on these very limited data, it would appear that the students found the communication skills relevant and that the program met their needs as they moved from the content ("knowing what") to the process ("knowing how").

A one day assessment center was developed for thirty-five Executive MBA (EMBA) students to assess their competence in the same ten management action skills previously listed. These students had completed readings on uses of assessment center technology as well as had discussions and readings concerning leadership effectiveness. Twenty students were selected to participate as assessees while the remainder of the class was assigned to be assessors. Three "expert" assessors were assigned to be assessor facilitators for the project. Those selected as assessors had either prior assessment center experience or had had some form of fairly similar management development experience. This assessment experience was strictly developmental; no letter grade was attached to either the roles of assessee or assessor.

EMBA assessors participated in one day of intensive training prior to the scheduled assessment center, designed to help them learn to recognize behaviors that represent each management skill, practice differentiating between behaviors and inferences, review rating errors and how to avoid them, and categorize and record management behaviors. At the conclusion of the training, assessors reported a substantial gain, not only in behavioral observation and assessment skills, but in their awareness of the nature of critical management skills. This gain in awareness was further supported by participation in the actual assessment exercises themselves. A center administrator with previous assessment experience was designated to oversee procedures during the assessment experience. This administrator explained to the participants issues such as professionalism, confidentiality, stress, reading the assessment schedule, etc. Five experienced assessors were assigned as "team facilitators" to provide additional professionalism and experience to the assessor teams. Finally, the importance of professional career development was highlighted by collecting career related information, as well as self-perceptions of the participants, both prior to and after the assessment experience.

The assessment procedure included four of the assessment exercises discussed above: a problem solving task force, two role plays--a counseling interview and a meeting with a vice president, a problem analysis, and, as an extension of the problem analysis, an oral presentation. These exercises focused on executive management actions and provided multiple opportunities for candidates to demonstrate competence in each management skill. Each individual was assessed during different exercises and simulations by four assessors. Although these exercises were designed to be fairly stressful, the schedule included time for individuals to assemble for a closing discussion and evaluation of the assessment experience.

Seven-hour consensus discussions followed the assessment exercises. During these discussions each assessor described both positive and negative behaviors observed during the assessment process, with assessors reporting observations for each of the assessees in a different exercise. As a team, the assessors evaluated the participant's performance on each exercise and reached consensus on a rating for each management skill. In addition, assessors described positive and negative behaviors demonstrated by the participant, with suggestions for improvement. Finally, one of the "expert" assessment facilitators wrote an elaborate feedback report for each individual assessed, using the input derived from the consensus discussions between the four assessors who had observed the individual being assessed.

To provide feedback and discuss written evaluations, one member of the assessment team met with each assessee individually. Each assessee received an overall assessment rating, an overview of individual strengths and weaknesses in the various management skills, a graphic representation of the skill ratings, and written documentation of behaviors observed in each of the assessed skills. Additionally, each candidate and the member of the assessment team discussed strategies for further development, such as books to read or recommended coursework. Although no follow-up activities were required, the connection between the recommended strategy and future career opportunities was an integral part of the discussion.

Both assessees and assessors rated as "positive" the value of participating in the assessment process. Although admittedly anxious at the outset, the assessees left the assessment experience with clear documentation of their strengths in targeted management skills and a strategy for future growth. This was particularly helpful for individuals, especially in their mid stages of their careers. Their comments supported the developmental value of the assessment process: "This is the most extensive feedback I've ever received;" "There are no excuses now. This feedback will be the catalyst for me to develop my skills in communication, problem-solving and delegation;" "Overall, extremely useful information;" "If I get a promotion, you can take the credit!" Assessors were equally supportive of the value of the assessment process. They noted, "This has strengthened my observational skills;" "I now have a better framework for mentoring others in specific behaviors;" "My rating skills are definitely sharper"; "Even documenting and writing meaningful feedback should be easier."

Based on the three experiences described here, the advantages of teaching action skills clearly outweigh some of the admittedly obvious disadvantages of such assessment techniques--eg., high investment of time, difficulty in securing trained assessors, design of meaningful exercises, coordination of complex assessment activities, preparation of detailed feedback reports, integration of program in the curriculum etc. To help avoid some of these problems in teaching action skills, the experiences in using assessment center technology described here suggest attention to certain issues are critical, regardless of the approach chosen. The following guidelines have evolved over the past three years and, while not exhaustive, reflect some important lessons:

1. Enlist the interest and support of faculty members, cross-departmentally, in an action skill focus. While OB/HRM or even more broadly, the management faculty may be the primary supporters of such a focus, it is necessary to have input from marketing, finance, and accounting in implementing a program which is relevant to the entire business curriculum.

2. Network with others in the business community who are using assessment activities as part of employee selection or development programs. These individuals will be helpful in start-up and maintenance activities such as determining relevant skills, developing exercises to reveal relevant skills, and participating as assessors.

3. Train a group of interested students in behavioral observation. A large pool of individuals from which to draw for assessor teams is needed.

4. Define the nature of managerial skills as the "basics." While it might be interesting to examine various facets and nuances of skills, there is not enough time to assess accurately and teach more than ten or twelve skills in the kinds of experiences described above, given the time constraints of quarter and semester systems.

5. Use existing exercises and role plays as prototypes for drawing out the skills that have been targeted. After experiencing some success with these, they can be varied according to different industries and sectors (e.g., health care, mining, manufacturing, retail sales, etc.).

6. Integrate the microcomputer into the assessment process. This is certainly feasible and desirable for activities such as an inbasket or a problem analysis.

7. Use videotape to record all interpersonal interactions. This allows the scheduling of activities through an instructional media lab, where both instructors, assessors and assessees can review the tape and assess the behaviors at convenient times. This tape can also be given to other assessors for their review and feedback. The most potent feedback is the visual feedback of specific behaviors.

8. Draw on the mentoring skills of former business graduates who are perceived as effective managers. These individuals can work one-on-one with students who are weak in certain skills.

9. Provide the students with documentation of the "value added" by their participation in a skill assessment learning experience.

10. Seek opportunities to share with business school constituents what is happening with this approach to management action skills. Faculty, students, prospective employers and the business community should be aware of how the assessment process can be a vital link between "the university on the hill" and the "real world."

11. Work with the dean and department chairs to build a reward system so that there will be a payoff for faculty members to engage in action skill teaching. The labor intensity of the program must be somehow balanced by an incentive system seen as equitable to the faculty members involved.

12. Actively seek private funding to provide opportunities for expanding both the depth and breadth of the action skill focus.

If business schools are to respond to the needs of the management world in the decade ahead, more emphasis on the actual attainment of managerial skills must become a part of the curriculum. Applying the assessment center technology to the business curriculum offers one method of ensuring that business students are not only exposed to relevant managerial skills, but also that they are apprised of their competence in those skills, trained to enhance those skills and then reassessed to ascertain progress in those skills. This technology also offers a way to establish an approach oriented toward ensuring that business students are prepared for the complexity of the managerial tasks which they will face in the "real" world.

Such an approach to skill assessment and development can be accomplished at each of the various levels of the business school curricula. The three approaches described here illustrate how different student "clients" can be offered exposure to the assessment technology both within and outside their business school curriculum. The lessons that were learned from these three experiences certainly suggest that the process is not a panacea. Yet, it is clear that an action skill focus is well worth the investment of time, energy and money required. Through a skill focus such as this business schools can and will provide a strong link between the "input" and "output" of management education. This approach not only offers a way to address some of the undernourished curricular areas noted by Porter and McKibbin (1988), it also offers a way to address their concern with the lack of sufficient integration across disciplines. The use of the assessment technology offers one of the best mechanisms to allow the student/participant to practice the integration of several managerial skills and analytical techniques learned from the broad business school educational process.