| FAQ - Personality Assessments
Using Assessments:
|
I have heard that
testing is not legal. Is that true? |
|
That is clearly not
true. In fact, proper use of good assessments can provide
the most effective documentation of objective and nondiscriminatory
hiring practices. Most legal issues occur when those instruments
are used inconsistently or improperly. It is important to
consult with individuals who are knowledgeable in such applications.
Too often companies have failed to gain the benefits of
new assessment technology because of conservative but uninformed
advice. In today's competitive world, businesses can no
longer afford not to explore every possible competitive
advantage.
|
|
Won't some people
be offended by being asked to complete a test? |
|
Certainly, but if some people are offended
by a company's sincere and professional efforts to ensure the
success of their employees through effective job matching, it is a
small price to pay for the overall benefits to all employees in the
company.
|
|

|
|
Aren't there some people who just don't
do well on tests? |
|
The inherent concept in the newest assessment technology is that
all people are good at something, but no one is good at everything.
That includes testing. In general, most people are anxious about
taking any kind of assessment. This reaction has been conditioned by
years in school, where passing or failing a test determined an
individual's class standing. Other tests such as driving tests or
medical tests also contributed to this attitude. This is why it is
important to explain the purpose of any test or assessment to all
candidates before it is given. Many of the latest instruments
provide preliminary messages that do exactly that and put the
candidate at ease, whether the instrument is delivered on the
Internet or on paper.
It is important to recognize that people with poor skills will
seldom be enthusiastic when asked to take a test to measure those
skills. People with performance problems will not be enthusiastic
about completing an assessment to see how their abilities match a
particular job. That is exactly why assessments are a vital part of
today's business world. Effective assessment instruments can
identify the critical areas that people do not want to reveal, but
that the business must know in order to make the best decision.
|
|

|
|
Our selection
process is rather long now. How can we find time to fit in any
tests? |
|
The use of good assessments tends to
collapse the time needed for selection decisions, not make it
longer. Using a 10 minute instrument such as FirstViewTM
enables an employer to effectively screen out unsuitable candidates
before spending substantial amounts of interviewing time with them.
By focusing the selection efforts on those candidates that are most
likely to succeed, employers can not only make faster decisions but
more accurate decisions. By accelerating the hiring decision,
employers also become more competitive at capturing talent in their
job market.
|
|

|
|
We use recruiters for our key positions.
Finding good people is their job. Why should we use
testing? |
|
Professional recruiters can offer significant advantages in
seeking candidates for many positions, but it is important to
remember these caveats: - Recruiters get paid for filling
positions. - Recruiters do not get paid for screening out
candidates. - The worst recruiter using good assessments will
make fewer mistakes than the best recruiter who does not use
assessments.
By incorporating good assessments into the recruiting process,
you gain the benefits of recruiting professionals and at the same
time, gain insurance against them making a mistake that costs you
money.
|
|

|
|
We use a customized
interview system that seems to be effective. Do we also need
testing? |
|
Customized interview systems, behavioral
event-based interviewing, targeted interviewing, and
competency-based interviewing are all sound methods for identifying
potentially successful job candidates. Several systems use bio-data
surveys to profile successful employees and then attempt to match
interviewees to that profile. These programs can be an effective
part of an employer's hiring process, however, they lack the
objective measurement of current assessments. As more people become
involved with the interviewing, the system becomes more vulnerable
to the subjective differences of each individual interviewer. The
process also requires a substantial amount of interviewing time to
accomplish the screening that newer instruments such as
FirstViewTM can do in a matter of minutes. These
instruments even provide behavioral interview questions based on the
individual characteristics of the candidates. By screening
candidates before in-depth interviews, the process is made much more
efficient. FirstViewTM can actually be adapted to
incorporate your own interview questions into the
FirstViewTM system, and then you can have the best of
both worlds
|
|

|
|
We use an industrial psychologist. Why
should we consider assessments? |
|
Industrial psychologists play an important role by supplying a
professional psychological opinion as a supplement to many
decision-making processes. This can be quite expensive however. It
often makes sense to use an inexpensive assessment tool, such as
FirstViewTM, to screen out unsuitable candidates before
incurring the expense of the psychologist.
Several things must also be clear about the role of the
psychologist: - The use of an industrial psychologist to supply
information used for a hiring or placement decision in no way
limits the exposure of the client company to federal and state
regulations (e.g. If that information can be shown to be
discriminatory, the decision can be shown to be
discriminatory.). - The psychologist's summary information is
only as good as the assessments used to obtain the initial data.
(i.e. A psychologist using First or Second Generation tools cannot
provide Fifth or Sixth Generation quality information.).
|
|

|
|
I want to use
assessments to help us hire better people. What is the best way to
do that? |
|
The best answer to that question depends
upon many factors, such as the nature of the employer, the
population of job candidates, the current market conditions, and
many more.
|
|

|
|
Can we use
assessments with our current employees? |
|
Of course, you can use assessments in many
ways with existing employees. Good assessment information can help
solve performance problems and improve working relationships
dramatically. You may also use them selectively; it is not necessary
to test as comprehensively as in a hiring situation.
|
|
 |
Choosing Assessments
|
I
tried one of those DISC-type instruments and the report
really seemed to describe me pretty well. Doesn't that mean
the test is a good one? |
|
Not necessarily. All personality tests work to some degree.
The question for you is whether the information is specific
enough to drive serious business decisions. Many simple
instruments rely on a psychological experience known as
the "P.T. Barnum Effect." Experiments have demonstrated
that when personality reports are written in fairly general
terms, most people judge them to be accurate representations
of themselves. This "Effect" is the trick behind the "try
it and see if it is accurate" approach. It is not that
the information is wrong, but that it is seldom adequate
for serious business decisions. In fact, one expert described
such reports as being "just right enough to be dangerously
wrong."
|
|

|
|
What should I look for in
selecting an instrument? |
|
First of all, be clear on what you want the instrument to do.
Instruments are designed for specific uses. Ask to see example of
how the instruments were used.
Second, consider your resources. Who will be using the
information? Certain instruments provide excellent information but
considerable training is required to use the information
effectively. This can be a problem if you want the information to be
useful to a wide range of people. FirstViewTM produces a
unique form of report writing, known as a virtual interview. This
type of report requires no interpretation or training and offers
specific information on job behaviors.
Third, consider the logistics of your application. Do you want
the instrument available online? On paper? On Screen? Do you want to
process the reports in-house?
Fourth, how much time do you have? Traditionally, higher quality
instruments required as much as 1-2 hours to complete; the only
shorter instruments were of substantially less quality.
FirstViewTM was the first in a new Generation of higher
quality assessment tools that require less than 15 minutes to
complete.
|
|

|
|
How do I know an instrument is
valid? |
|
All instruments
are valid for some purpose. Validity is not an intrinsic
characteristic. Assessments are validated for a specific
use within a specific population. (Eg. DISC-type and Myers-Brigg
Type instruments were never intended to be used as a stand-alone
for hiring decisions, but as a vehicle to discuss communication
styles or to assist in behavioral interviewing.) Be certain
that the products you choose were developed for the purpose
you need.
|
|

|
|
I have heard that I should ask to see
the technical manual for the instrument. What is
that? |
|
A thorough technical manual describes the development
of the instrument. It will generally include the objectives of the
instrument's use; the concepts behind its design; the methodology
used in the development process; and the statistical data upon which
the instrument's information is based. Unfortunately, the existence
of a technical manual, regardless of how thick or complex it may be,
is not a guarantee of quality. Knowing that most buyers are not
trained to understand psychometric terminology and statistical data,
a number of companies have put quite a bit of creative energy into
providing an impressive technical manual for some rather
unimpressive products. You would do well to consider the author of
these manuals and who was the technical expertise behind the
development of the instrument. Fortunately, many of the newer
instruments are offering user-friendly versions of their technical
manuals, which are designed to educate the users and provide a guide
to making a sound decision. FirstViewTM's Technical
Manual is an example of this innovation. It was authored by Dr.
Leonard Goodstein, former President of the American Psychological
Association and co-author of Personality Assessment, one of the
principal textbooks on the subject of assessments.
|
|

|
|
We
have used a first generation instrument for years and everyone
really likes it. Why should we change? |
|
First of all, it
is important to separate the emotional feelings of familiarity
from the pragmatic issues of effectiveness. Think back to
your first computer. Was it a 386; 486; Mac SE? Do you still
use it? Of course not! Did it stop working? Probably not.
You just changed to newer technology because it could do
things the old computer could not. Assessment technology
is the same thing. Fifth and sixth generation instruments
are simply capable of providing levels of information undreamed
of with earlier instruments.
|
|

|
|
What do you think about
instruments that rely on success profiles or benchmarking of
jobs? |
|
Success profiling was a method for studying large populations of
homogenous workers to determine the characteristics that were common
to those workers producing a superior level of performance. This
methodology is the core strategy of many popular assessment
instruments, and it is very appealing to businesses who want to
"hire more people like that one." This strategy can be effective in
the right circumstances, with a large population of people in the
same jobs, working in the same conditions, with the same resources,
with the same management, in a stable environment. However, when the
jobs vary, or the management varies, or the environment changes
frequently, or other things are different, the success profiling
concept becomes problematical.
The other limitation is in the collection of data. Most companies
have difficulty agreeing on exactly what top performance is. The
answer for some assessment companies is to refer buyers to their
years of research and many thousands of people tested. They then
provide success profiles based upon this data. Experience shows that
while these ready made success patterns can be helpful in some
cases, they seldom deliver the results that the buyer expects.
Small businesses also have difficulty using the benchmarking
concept, since they have many positions with only one or two
employees, and therefore lack a robust sample for the study. Job
requirement questionnaires may be used to collect data on such
positions, but it can be difficult. More importantly, small business
employees must generally function in many roles, depending upon the
demands of business. The jobs are rarely stable enough to develop
reliable profiles.
Even when success profiles are successfully created, they must be
revisited on a regular basis to ensure that they still match the
positions. With the rapid pace of change in today's business world,
this can be as often as every six months.
|
|

|
|
We were considering creating
our own tests. Wouldn't that be better than buying something off the
shelf? |
|
It depends on what you are trying to measure. If there
is some unique skill, ability, or set of knowledge that is critical
to successful performance in a particular job, and there is not an
existing instrument that measures that, it may be necessary to
construct one. However, if job success is more dependent upon a
unique combination of fundamental characteristics of behavior and
abilities, it is much better to use established tools. The major
assessment instruments, such as those in the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth
Generations, required years to develop; thousands of people to
participate in the normative studies; many hundreds of thousands of
dollars; and the expertise found in a relatively small number of
psychometric experts. It is usually more economical and more
effective to buy that level of expertise. While producing
"customized" tests may offer a surface appeal, it is rarely a wise
expenditure of resources with so many other options
available. | |
|
|
|
Used by permission of the publisher: HRD Press, Amherst, Massachusetts. Copyright © 2002, Psichometrics, LLC
|
|