An Exploratory Study of Two Decades of Promotional Testing in a Metropolitan Police Department

Abstract

This study explored the career progression of police officers in a police department by examining the relation among 13 promotional tests at four ranks administered to 1,960 candidates over two decades. It was hypothesized that performance on promotional tests would be relatively stable during a law enforcement career, consistent with research demonstrating consistency in general mental ability. Overall, 28% of subjects retested one or more times and their retest scores on non-equivalent forms correlated about .40 with their initial scores. On average, subjects increased their score by one-fifth of a standard deviation by retesting. With some exceptions, candidate performance on promotional tests significantly correlated with tests for the immediately superior rank as well as tests for higher ranks as much as 15 years later. However, using multiple regression to predict performance on higher rank tests by combining lower rank tests was unsuccessful. Implications for the management of police promotional testing programs are discussed as well as suggestions for future research.In 1989, a promotional examination for sergeant was conducted, resulting in a rank-order list with ten pages and 747 names. Of interest was the first page consisting of candidates ranked 1 through 78. Many of these individuals later promoted to leadership roles, including 15 lieutenants, 11 captains, four deputy chiefs, two assistant chiefs, and a chief. In essence, a substantial portion of a department's executive leadership in 2010 appeared at the top of an eligible list from a test conducted 20 years before.This outcome is familiar to HR analysts and managers working in civil service testing. Most of us have observed the advancement of talented candidates and the rank and file often predict who will appear at the top of eligible lists from which promotions are made. Some coworkers attribute the success to "good test taking" or "book knowledge" while others acknowledge the intense motivation of these rising stars who may study for a year or more. Not surprisingly, a recent study found selfreported motivation to correlate with test performance (McCarthy et al. 2009).Most law enforcement agencies have a well-defined rank hierarchy and therefore predefined paths for career progression. And to varying degrees, most conduct promotional examinations which result in public lists, often with ranks and scores. These eligible lists provide a rich historical record of employee career progression. Despite the availability of volumes of raw data, no one appears to have explored the relationship among sequential promotional tests administered over an entire career. That was the purpose of this study. Of particular interest was the consistency of candidate performance on tests at different ranks and the prevalence and outcome of retesting.To begin, it is clear that assessment centers (AC) are valid predictors of performance during a career. In a metaanalysis integrating the results of 34 validation studies, Arthur et al. (2003) regressed assessor ratings ...

An evaluation of the promotional processes in a large Texas metropolitan police department

“…There is very little research on promotions of executive level employees in police organizations (Topp, 2011). This study fills an important gap in understanding the promotional processes in a police organization by answering; what does it take to get promoted?…”

“…Additionally, there was a four-year gap between the first and second promotional test, and a two-year gap between the second and third test. Practice effects, did not present more than a minimal problem (Topp, 2011). In addition to regression artifacts, range restriction was also a concern.…”

“…A total of 79 (39 percent) were promoted to lieutenant. This testing scheme is not unusual for police departments (Topp, 2011). It appears completely objective and able to provide the department with the best, most qualified lieutenants.…”

“…Extreme scores at one time are closer to the mean at another time (Hausknecht et al, 2007). The retest effect could account for as much as a one-fifth of a standard deviation in mean differences (Topp, 2011). Owing to the low scores needed on the written test to qualify for the AC, and the absence of extreme mean differences in each AC score, regression to the mean was more difficult to access.…”

“…Up to now, police promotional processes have received little attention from academics (Topp, 2011). Much of the extant research focusses on predictors of success in an assessment center (AC), or on the relationship between the candidates' demographics and promotability.…”