IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0339872.html

Comparison of virtual reality development centers and 270-degree evaluations in the context of mid-level managers’ competencies

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Baczyńska
  • Zhenyao Cai
  • Konrad Urbański
  • Łukasz Szajda

Abstract

Virtual Reality Development Centres (VRDCs) represent a recent extension of Assessment Center (AC) methodology, yet empirical evidence on their validity and their relationship to established evaluation systems remains limited. This study addresses this gap by examining how VRDC assessments—grounded in immersive, real-time behavioral observation—converge with traditional 270-degree evaluations and self-assessments across five managerial competencies. Using a sample of 64 mid-level managers who completed 16 VRDC sessions and parallel 270-degree evaluations, we tested three hypotheses concerning convergent validity and unique diagnostic value. VRDC demonstrated strong inter-rater reliability (rwg = .82–.95; ICC(2) =.76–.92) and showed significant alignment with 270-degree ratings for managing people and tasks, goal orientation, and change management, but not for decision-making or cooperation. Self-assessments correlated with VRDC only for cooperation, and negatively for managing people and tasks, revealing consistent self-perception biases. Across all competencies, VRDC provided diagnostic insights not captured by self-report, supporting its added theoretical value. The findings contribute to theory by clarifying the distinct construct domains captured by immersive behavioral simulations versus retrospective, perception-based evaluations. We argue that VRDC should be conceptualized not merely as a technological enhancement, but as a methodological bridge that integrates AC logic with multi-source frameworks. Practically, VRDC offers organizations a reliable and context-sensitive tool for assessing crisis-relevant competencies, complementing—but not replacing—traditional evaluation methods. The study advances the theoretical understanding of VR-based assessment and informs the development of multimethod competency assessment systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Baczyńska & Zhenyao Cai & Konrad Urbański & Łukasz Szajda, 2026. "Comparison of virtual reality development centers and 270-degree evaluations in the context of mid-level managers’ competencies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(2), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0339872
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339872
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339872&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0339872?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0339872. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.