Organizational Psychology

Purpose. The purpose of the paper is to outline the current state of research on the validity of Assessment centers widely regarded among the most popular methods of personnel assessment. Also the method of Assessment centers is compared with other evaluation methods. Study design. This paper reviews the past and current meta-analysis studies on a predictive validity of the assessment center. Such studies provide different validity findings ranging from 0.28 to 0.63. Possible causes of such differences and consideration of the general questions of the validity analysis of the assessment center have been reviewed. Findings. The validity of assessment centers is higher in those cases: when more types of exercises are using; when assessors are professional psychologists (not managers); and when the Assessment Center includes 360-degrees peer feedback. Assessment centers provide better results, when it considered as a sum of different indicators. There is a tendency to provide more differentiated view of the results in contemporary practice of assessment center. Research implications for practice. According to the authors, the employment of assessment centers is justified and leads to a much more positive consequences for the company than any other method. The real validity of assessment centers in the conducted meta-analyzes can be considerably undervalued for several reasons. Such as small samples, indirect restriction of samples, difficulties in selecting objective effectiveness criteria for the managerial positions, selection weak criteria for the validation for mass assessment procedures.Value of the results. While the debate over the issue of the validity of the assessment center remains popular it reveals that additional research seems needed on. Areas of development and exploration are recommended, and limits associated with the Assessment Center practice are highlighted.