PERSONNEL SELECTION FOR THE PROHIBITION BUREAU

THE PROBLEM

When Congress passed the bill creating a separate Prohibition Bureau and requiring that all employees of that bureau acquire a civil-service status through the usual channels of competitive examination, a heavy responsibility was placed on the Civil Service Commission. To the commission was given the problem of determining, on the basis of a personal investigation and a competitive examination, which of the men already in service and willing to compete for retention were qualified and could be retained, and which were not qualified and hence should be dismissed; which were able to do the work of higher-grade positions, and which were qualified only for less responsible positions than those they had held in the past.

The new act necessitated a complete reorganization. It was required that every position, with the exception of that of commissioner, be filled from registers of applicants who had passed civil-service examinations.

The difficulties which this reorganization involved are obvious. Many of the persons affected by this law have been in prohibition work since the first Federal prohibition law became effective, seven years ago. Regardless of their efficiency, it is probable that the majority of these persons feel that they have filled their positions satisfactorily and that they should be retained.

In order to retain their positions, it became necessary, according to the new law, for these employees to compete with men outside the service. Merely passing the civil-service examination and securing a place on a register of eligibles could not insure a man's remaining in the service. He had to demonstrate his abilities in comparison with those of men who, although they did not have experience in the Prohibition Unit, might in many cases be better fitted for the work than the average employee was.

The Civil Service Commission endeavored to insure absolutely fair and unquestionably just selection of eligibles under this new law. All applicants were required to take an open competitive examination-no one was rated solely on the basis of past experience. For executives, it is true, the careful investigation of experience records took the place of the written part of the examination, but these applicants were given a special oral examination. All applicants other than those for executive positions, however, were required to take a specially devised written examination in addition to the oral examination. No applicant for any of the positions was exempt from a most thorough character investigation.

The development of the oral examinations and the procedure followed in conducting them are explained later in this report. The remainder of this section of the report is concerned only with the development of the written examination used for applicants for nonadministrative positions.

WRITTEN EXAMINATION

Content

The content of the written examination was determined through an analysis of the work of the Prohibition Bureau.

Special abilities which might be tested in this written examination were considered with respect to their necessity for success in prohibition work. For instance, ability to deal with legal or investigative problems was noted as being possibly a necessary qualification. The capacity of exercising judgment in

dealing with such problems is essential, and problems designed to test this ability were included in the examination. Legal knowledge, however, such as would be gained in a formal course in law, is not necessary in a person entering the prohibition service.

It is true that the prohibition officer must have a certain knowledge of regulations and methods of procedure before he can serve competently, but this information can be readily acquired, provided that the individual has sufficient general adaptability. To measure knowledge usually gained after entrance into the service would give an unfair advantage to numerous applicants who had previously been in the service, and who, even though they may have been discharged because of incompetence, would have gained valuable information to which persons outside the service have no access.

Character traits were not considered in connection with this part of the examination, since character can not be reliably measured by any written examination now available. Such of the character traits as are essential for prohibition work are dealt with in the investigation that is undertaken after the applicants have passed the written examination.

The study of the duties of agents, investigators, and inspectors in the prohibition force indicated the desirability of securing for appointment men of superior mental qualities. Aside from character traits and good physical condition, general adaptability is the chief qualification which is essential for success in investigative work. The written examination, as finally constructed, was designed to measure this qualification.

Principles considered in construction

When the nature of the content of the written examination had been decided, attention was given to the form in which it should be presented. Every item of the test was made to conform to the following principles of test construction: 1. Examination material should be objective in so far as possible; that is, answers to problems should be so controlled as to eliminate any doubt as to the fairness of the credit given to any competitor.

This principle was considered especially important because it was expected that there would be numerous requests for reviews of competitors' papers as soon as ratings were assigned on the basis of this examination, and it was desirable that there could be no question as to the fairness with which a competitor's paper was rated. With each of the questions included in the objective part of the examination there are five suggested answers, only one of which is a correct answer. The competitor simply indicates the number of the answer he considers correct. His answer is definitely right or wrong; no partial credits need be allowed.

2. Examination material should be practical, and also appear practical. Problems presented should be of types which prohibition officers actually meet. All the material used in the written examination was closely related to prohibition work. While problems based on general subject matter could be used to measure the mental ability necessary, they might appear impractical both to applicants taking the examination and to officials interested in the examination. For this reason the commission prepared a special examination in which the subject matter dealt entirely with prohibition work, and this test was used in preference to the tests of general adaptability already in use in other examinations. Before the objective items of the new prohibition test were adopted, however, they were given to a trial group who also took one of the general adaptability tests already in use. This trial was made in order to establish the fact that the new test actually does measure general adaptability.

Three types of items were included in the objective section of the testscase items, items requiring interpretation of regulations, and vocabulary items. Samples of these are shown on page 35.

Case items were designed to test the extent of the applicant's judgment in solving problems such as arise in prohibition work. These items ranged in difficulty from those requiring judgment on the most complicated investigative problems to those requiring simple reasoning on fairly obvious points. The practicability of a test which measures reasoning ability is apparent when it is realized that a prohibition officer in the field must often rely upon his own judgment in handling important situations.

Items designed to measure the applicant's ability to interpret orders or rulings were included, because the prohibition officer must base his actions on his interpretation of orders and rulings issued by headquarters.

Vocabulary items were included to test knowledge of the meaning of the words used in rules and regulations. Obviously, rules and regulations can not be correctly interpreted without a knowledge of the meaning of the words in the regulations-hence the importance of testing knowledge of the words. Previous studies, moreover, have indicated that vocabulary items have, in addition to their value for testing knowledge of words, a high value in selecting individuals of superior general intelligence.

Items of the types included in the written test were previously tried in experimental tests given to investigators, detectives, and narcotic agents, in order to determine the validity and the difficulty of such questions.

3. The difficulty and the time allowance should be suitable and fair. The examination should be of such difficulty and the time allowed the competitor for answering the questions should be such as to make it evident that any person who fails to make a passing score does not possess the qualifications that would justify his being assigned to a position in the prohibition service.

The difficulty of the items was determined by carefully conducted trials. Items included in the examination were selected on the basis of the findings of these trials and on standards of difficulty indicated by previous studies for positions of similar nature. The time required by civil-service employees for taking the examination indicated that no one could profitably devote more than two hours to it; so that time allowance was fixed. The two-hour period proved more than ample the majority of competitors turned in their papers before the time limit required them to do so.

4. Special care should be taken to make problems which are absolutely fair and which do not give an advantage to any one group of applicants. Because of an unusual circumstance in connection with this examination-the fact that a large percentage of the competitors were already actually employed at the work for which they were competing-the application of this principle was especially difficult.

While all the problems were expressed in terms of prohibition work, they were designed to test only judgment or reasoning and not to measure knowledge of the policies of the Prohibition Bureau, or aptness in supplying a law to fit a case. For example, questions which involve knowledge of law, such as knowledge of the circumstances under which arrests can be made without a warrant, were not included.

Since laws of different States differ on such matters as the use of intoxicants for medicinal purposes, fairness to all applicants demanded that, in any test item involving such a question, there should be a definite statement as to the ruling which applied.

Efforts to secure fairness were not confined to the original preparation of test material. When a large number of items had been constructed, a thorough study was made of them. They were reviewed and criticized by all the members of the personnel of the commission who were connected with the project. They were given to a test group, for purposes of trial, and were then revised and criticized again before they were finally approved.

In order to obviate the possibility that any objection might be made to the examination on the grounds that the method of presentation was unfamiliar and therefore unfair to the applicant, sample questions, with directions for answering them, were sent out with the announcement of the examination. The announcement included the following explanation of the objective test form and the advantages of its use:

There are several ways in which you can explain, in a written examination, the action which you think should be taken in any given situation such as will be presented to you in the mental tests.

In some cases a situation which might arise is presented and you are asked to write 100 or 150 words telling what you think should be done.

In other cases a situation which might arise is presented, and following this there are five suggestions as to the action which might be taken. When the problem is presented in this way you merely indicate which of the five suggested answers is the best procedure to take. * * With this kind of question, you do not take the time to write long answers; for each question you write only one number—the number indicating the correct

answer.

*

To provide for the possibility that these samples may have been overlooked, time was provided for the competitors to study the sample test just before the regular examination was taken. As shown in the following reproduction, this sample test contains a clear explanation of the method of arriving at the answers to the questions. In order to make certain that each competitor received a copy of the sample test and in order to simplify examination procedure, the sample test was printed on the front page of the folder on which the examination was printed.

Directions and sample questions

Do not write out the answers to these questions; for each of the questions, you write only ONE NUMBERthe NUMBER indicating the best

answer.

In answering questions based on cases of law violation, you are to assume that the only facts or clues which are known in the case are those given in the question. You are to indicate which of the suggested actions you, as a prohibition agent, would take in order to meet the situation or solve the problem.

SAMPLE 1. An inspector of a bonded winery discovers that, on a large number of casks which were sealed for storage, the seals have been cut and glued together again. Which of the following is the BEST action for the inspector to take? (1) Have the seals examined to find out whether or not they are genuine. (2) Take sample of the contents for a chemical test and then reseal the casks. (3) Weigh the casks to discover whether part of their con

a

tents has been removed. (4) Open the casks and, if they are full, have them resealed in his presence. (5) Open the casks and, if they are not full, have them destroyed

If

This question is based on a case which is typical of those with which the prohibition officer must deal. you were the inspector, ought you to do (1) or (2) or (3) or (4) or (5)? You know that the seals have been cut and, therefore, that the casks have probably been opened. If a cask was opened, the contents may have been diluted or changed. The only way you can determine positively whether this has been done is by having a chemical test made. So (2) is the only correct answer. Write "2" on the line at the right.

You are also to assume, in answering questions of this type, that the events upon which the questions are based occur in a State where a licensed physician is permitted to issue pre

Directions and sample questions-Continued