Hilgardia
Hilgardia
Hilgardia
University of California
Hilgardia

Quality evaluations should not be taken for granted

Author

Gregory Encina Billikopf

Author Affiliations

G.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 gebillikopf@ucdavis.edu.

Publication Information

Hilgardia 61(1):35-39. DOI:10.3733/ca.v061n01p35. January 2007.

PDF of full article, Cite this article

Abstract

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.

References

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 .

Billikopf G. 2007. Quality evaluations should not be taken for granted. Hilgardia 61(1):35-39. DOI:10.3733/ca.v061n01p35
Webmaster Email: wsuckow@ucanr.edu