Quality evaluations should not be taken for granted
AuthorGregory Encina Billikopf
Author AffiliationsG.E. Billikopf is Area Labor Management Farm Advisor, UC Cooperative Extension, Stanislaus County. Readers may request an Excel spreadsheet for calculating reliability and test scores, or obtain additional information from the author at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Hilgardia 61(1):35-39. DOI:10.3733/ca.v061n01p35. January 2007.
Subjective quality-evaluation errors in agriculture, such as discarding good-quality product and packing poor-quality product, can be costly to growers and workers. This study of workers and supervisors in a strawberry-plant packingshed revealed the danger in assuming that those responsible for quality control truly understand what is required. We found that the ability of workers to correctly count plants, and to retain or reject them (and explain why), varied considerably. The results highlight the need for employers to carefully define quality parameters, and then test employees and applicants. When top management does not agree on exactly what constitutes acceptable quality, it is difficult to expect quality-control inspectors and workers to understand. Testing, as a tool, can help growers and producers make better employee selection and placement decisions and can also be used for periodic training.
Anastasi A. Psychological Testing. 1982. 5th ed.MacMillan. 784p.
Billikopf GE. 1988. Agricultural Employment Testing: Opportunities for Increased Worker Performance. UC ANR, Giannini Found Spec Rep No 88–1. www.cnr. berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7research/giannini.htm .
Billikopf GE. 1994. Agricultural Labor Management: Cultivating Personnel Productivity. UC Agricultural Extension, Stanislaus County.
Billikopf GE. 2003. Agricultural Labor Management: Cultivating Personnel Productivity (2nd ed.). UC Agricultural Issues Center. ANR Pub 3417. www.cnr.berkeley. edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7labor/AgLabor.pdf .
Campbell CL, Madden LV. Introduction to Plant Disease Epidemiology. 1990. New York: Wiley-Inter-science. 523p.
Desrosiers J, Mercier L, Rochette A. Test-retest and inter-rater reliability of the French version of the Ontario Society of Occupational Therapy (OSOT) Perceptual Evaluation. Can J Occup Therapy. 1999. 66(3):134-9. (in French).
Federal Register. 1978. Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedure. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Section 60–3, 43 FR 38295. www.dol. gov/esa/regs/fedreg/final/2004004090.pdf .
Mcquillian S. 2001. Practice Variations: Inter-Rater Reliability Testing for Utilization Management Staff. Managed Care, www.managedcaremag.com/ archives/0106/0106.peer_rater.pdf
US Department of Labor. Testing and Assessment: An Employer's Guide to Good Practices. 1999. Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration. www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7labor/test_validity.pdf .
Also in this issue:The Predictive Models and Procedures Used in the Forest Stand Generator (STAG)
Taking the university to the people
Letters: January-March 2007
Expanded research to target E. coli outbreaks
Oaks: Research and outreach to prevent woodland loss
Treatments could slow spread of sudden oak death
Blue oak seedling age influences growth and mortality
Exclosure size affects young blue oak seedling growth
The Coyote Lure Operative Device revisited: A fresh look at an old idea
California cotton growers utilize integrated pest management
High spring temperatures decrease peach fruit size
California teachers support the Nutrition Competencies new nutrition instruction guidelines