Fitness for Duty Evaluation - Assignment Example

? Fitness-for-Duty Evaluation Introduction The following paper attempts to create a comprehensive, well-researched fitness-for-duty evaluation. The fitness-for-duty evaluation relies on a Midwestern state police department who recently responded to a barricaded active shooter incident, where the shooter had confined himself and his family in their home. During the scenario, the negotiator was able to persuade the shooter to release all his four young children but was unable to persuade the shooter to release his wife or surrender. The scenario resulted in the suicide of the active shooter in front of his spouse, who remained unharmed. The fitness-of-fit is aimed at evaluating the 35-year old negotiator who happened to be a white male. The negotiator is a seven-year veteran of the force who has three small children and is going through a divorce. Although the officer appears to be handling the stress well, a closer examination reveals that the negotiator shows signs of depression and anxiety, which were not present prior to the incident. Psychometric Instruments In order to test or evaluate the fitness-for-duty, there are many psychometric instruments applicable in the same. The instruments include MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator), FIRO-B, Strong Interest Inventory, Strength Deployment Inventory, and Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI). These psychometric instruments are applied in different scenarios and circumstances in a bid to evaluating fitness of negotiators (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). The negotiator in this case is seven years old within the force. The following discussion identifies some of the psychometric instruments applicable in this scenario as well as their justification. Myers Briggs Type Indicator: Myers Briggs Type Indicator is a psychometric instrument is regarded as one of the oldest and most respected instrument that has been used in evaluating fitness-of-duty (Giebels, Noelanders & Vervaeke, 2005). MBTI is a psychometric instrument used in assessing fundamental thinking preferences as well as involved in leadership and personal development of various persons. In addition, MBTI is also used in team coaching and also in enhancing effective communication amongst involved stakeholders. MBTI influences skills of negotiators whilst providing room for them to develop effective ways of dealing with conflict (Ostermann, 2002). With all these functions of MBTI, the psychometric instrument is very vital especially in such scenarios. In the above scenario, MBTI will be effective given that it has the capacity and capability of evaluating the fitness-of-duty of the negotiator. MBTI in this scenario is a psychometric instrument that will enhance the communication of the negotiator (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). In addition, MBTI will be able to assess the fundamental thinking capacity of the negotiator whilst adequately enabling him to be able to deal with various forms of conflicts effectively and efficiently (Giebels, Noelanders & Vervaeke, 2005). Personal developments in addition to team coaching are also some of the important aspects of fitness amongst various individuals. Therefore, MBTI will be an effective psychometric instrument in evaluating the fitness of the negotiator. FIRO-B: This is another credible psychometric instrument used in evaluating the fitness of various individuals. FIRO-B is a psychometric instrument used in measuring the behavior of an individual with other people within his or her surroundings (Ostermann, 2002). In addition, the instrument also dictates the expectations of an individual in respect to control, affection, as well as inclusion. FIRO-B is an effective instrument in making individuals to gain insight into their interpersonal needs and wants whilst making them aware of the various choices they make in life in respect to resolving conflicts (Ostermann, 2002). FIRO-B is applicable in team building, training, development, and counseling various individuals and couples. This psychometric instrument is useful in enhancing and evaluating fitness-for-duty of various individuals. In this scenario, the negotiator has been a veteran for seven years. Despite this, the negotiator has shown some signs of depression even after dealing with the shooter. In this perspective, there is need for the negotiator to gain insight in his interpersonal needs and wants. One effective instrument for enhancing insight into interpersonal needs and wants is the FIRO-B psychometric instrument (Giebels, Noelanders & Vervaeke, 2005). The instrument will also educate the negotiator in identifying and making choices with respect to resolving conflicts. FIRO-B will also counsel the negotiator in respect to the depression he is currently undergoing besides it will also make the negotiator understand how people with react to various situations (Ostermann, 2002). Team building and personal development of the negotiator is also important, which is attainable through FIRO-B psychometric instrument. Strong Interest Inventory: Strong interest inventory is a psychometric instrument that attempts to help individuals to identify the correct aspect of their roles or jobs that one should engage in with a view of attaining their self satisfaction (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). Through Strong Interest Inventory, individuals are able to identify effective roles and responsibilities that they should be involved in with a view of making it possible for them to gauge and understand their personality (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). Understanding personality is an important aspect of individuals to make sure that they are at their best in carrying out specific duties mandated to them. Strong Interest Inventory is actually a vital psychometric instrument in understanding roles and personality of individuals. The negotiator in this case seems to be having problems after effectively accomplishing his roles and responsibilities (Giebels, Noelanders & Vervaeke, 2005). It is important to make the negotiator to understand his roles and responsibilities that are attached to a specific responsibility or role. As a veteran police officer, the negotiator should be able to overcome all the difficult situations within the role or responsibility of a policeman (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). In any case, other than enabling the individual to understand his roles and responsibilities, the instruments will also enhance the individual’s personality. This is however possible through the Strong Interest Inventory, which is a psychometric instrument for enhancing role and personality. Strength Deployment Inventory: Strength Deployment Inventory is a psychometric instrument that identifies underlying motivation value system. Effectively this psychometric instrument will help identify events that follow when an individual is under stressful conditions and conflicts (Giebels, Noelanders & Vervaeke, 2005). Strength Deployment Inventory is an effective psychometric instrument or tool in developing individuals as well as teams in exploration of aspects that triggers stress and consequences of behavior especially in times of conflict. There are various aspects and activities that trigger stress of individuals (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). It is important to understand what triggers stress amongst individuals as well as sequences of various behaviors in every time there is conflict. Since the negotiator is showing some signs of depression, there is need to understand what triggered such stresses in him after accomplishing his responsibility or roles. A veteran police officer should be able to accomplish all tasks, responsibilities, and roles without triggering stress. Nonetheless, this does not mean that they are immune to aspects of stresses. As a result, there is a need to always identify various aspects that trigger stress (Ostermann, 2002). Identification of such aspects and activities that trigger stress is always the first step in solving the same. Therefore, the negotiator’s situation cannot be understood without knowing or identifying the root cause of the stressful indications that he is having. Attaining this is only effective through Strength Deployment Inventory as a psychometric instrument. Therefore, Strength Deployment Inventory in this case is a very effective psychometric instrument in evaluating fitness-of-duty amongst individuals. Clinical Semi-structured Interview Questions After identifying effective psychometric instrument to evaluate the fitness-of-fit duty, there is need for clinical semi-structured interview questions that are sensitive to issues of culture and ethics. Nonetheless, it should be noted that before conducting the interview, there is need to obtain informed consent from the examinee or participant (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). There are specific questions and information given to the examinee or participant, in this case negotiator in order to obtain informed consent as well as explain the meaning of the fitness-for-duty evaluation (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). The following are some of the semi-structured questions that can be asked in order to evaluate the fitness-for-duty of the negotiator. Semi-structured Questions 1. Describe in details the experience you have had within the working environment 2. Do you find some aspects of your work hard to put up with especially in respect to stress? Explain. 3. How do you get along with your colleagues at work and in your environment? 4. Tell me about your time off work. How do you use or spend time off work? 5. How is your work schedule? 6. Has the schedule at work affected your social life? If so, how? 7. Are there any other incidences in which you experienced stress within work? Tell me about such experiences. 8. How do you always deal with stressing experiences within the work? Explain. 9. Have you ever been referred to any specialists in respect to emotional or psychological torture as a result of work? Kindly explain. 10. What do you do when your colleagues annoy you at work place? Clinical fitness-for-duty written evaluation outline Clinical fitness-for-duty evaluation outline describes various procedures and steps that will be undertaken to carry out a fitness-for-duty evaluation (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). The fitness-for-duty evaluation outline will offer assistance to employees having problems that have the capacity and capability of impairing their work effectiveness in terms of attendance and performance. The fitness-for-duty evaluation outline aims at achieving the following objectives: To identify the main problem within the shortest time possible before it becomes bigger To motivate individuals in the workplace to seek for help voluntarily To provide direction to employees in respect to assistance programs To provide confidentiality and privacy aspects of treatment whenever an individual or team of employees are called upon for the same The outline for the evaluation will include: On-site assistance for employees: There is need to have on-site assistance for employees that provide services, which are free and confidential whilst conforming to various rules and regulations. Confidentiality: All information regarding employees will be treated with the highest possible confidentiality and privacy. The fitness-for-duty examinations must be maintained according to the rules and regulations of the organization (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). There will not be any release of employee records to unauthorized persons without a written consent from the employees (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). What’s more, the fitness-for-duty will ensure that all employees’ information are not only protected but also lawful and those that enhance performance and behavior. Contents of Fitness-for duty: The fitness-for-duty will involve testing various chemicals such as alcohols and drugs, referrals that are obtained from employees’ personal physicians, as well as referrals from medical specialists. Incident Testing: There is need to have incident testing amongst the employees through identification of accidents, physical altercations, as well as unlawful possessions as in the case of the shooter who had the gun. Reasonable Suspicion Testing: Even though reasonable suspicion testing is broad, there is need to have a well-described set of circumstances that will provide a proper and effective indication of an employee’s conduct through investigations and assessments (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). In addition, this will help to explore various explanations regarding conducts, appearances, or actions of employees within the organization. Responsibilities of employees: The fitness-for-duty in this case describes that every employee is responsible for specific actions that include performing their roles or jobs, reporting to work as required and fit to perform specific tasks assigned to them, and also notifying supervisors of any developments (Giebels, De Dreu, & Van de Vliert, 1998). Moreover, the employees are required to notify the supervisor especially if they observe a coworker having some undefined behavior, which is considered to be unfit. Responsibilities of Supervisors: Supervisors on the other hand are encouraged to perform their duty in order to provide a favorable environment that is fit for duty (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). In this perspective, supervisors are meant to observe and monitor attendance as well as performance coupled with employees’ behavior through supervision. Supervisors are meant to follow the fitness-for-duty policy and procedures accordingly whilst implementing the same policies and procedures in line with fairness. Identification of Impairment: Identification of impairments involves looking for actions that are capable of triggering the need to carry out an evaluation of employee’s fitness for duty. Such actions may include concentration, vision, coordination, speech, memory, and alertness. It is also important to identify inappropriate interactions with various coworkers as well as supervisors inclusive of the reactions to criticism. Recommendations and Conclusions There is no standard model for expressing the recommendations in respect to evaluation of fitness for duty of the employees. Nonetheless, it is important to understand that the employee in question is to some extent unfit for duty given that he has shown some signs of depression or stress. Employees who are unfit for duty should be examined in order to make them fit in order to enhance productivity (Adair, Weingart & Brett, 2007). Despite the unfitness of the employee, it should be noted that the unfitness is treatable. The officer in this situation is unfit but it can be cured through restoration of fitness within a reasonable time. It is important therefore, to engage in activities and strategies that will treat the unfitness of the employee in order to enhance effectiveness and efficiency of the employees. All the four psychometric instruments should be employed in order to find out effectively the problems that the employee is suffering from in order to obtain the best solution. In conclusion, it is obvious that there are circumstances when employees find themselves unfit for duty due to many reasons. In such circumstances, there is need to employ psychometric instruments in order to identify the problems that such employees are suffering from for purposes of developing a solution. Despite the many psychometric instruments, they all give the same result. Nonetheless, they apply in different situations or circumstances hence the need to come up with the best and effective psychometric instrument. Whilst developing an effective fitness for duty, it is important to develop clinical semi-structured interview questions there is also a need to develop an evaluation outline. References Adair, W. L., Weingart, L., & Brett, J. (2007). The timing and function of offers in U.S. and Japanese negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology,92, 1056–1068. Giebels, E., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van de Vliert, E. (1998). The alternative negotiator as the invisible third at the table: The impact of potency information. International Journal of Conflict Management, 9, 5–21. Giebels, E., Noelanders, S., & Vervaeke, G. (2005). The hostage experience: Implications for negotiation strategies. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Review, 12, 241–253. Ostermann, B. M. (2002). Cultural differences make negotiations different: Intercultural hostage negotiations. Journal of Police Crisis Negotiation, 2, 11–20. Read More