• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Psychometric Testing - Usage for recruitment

Ashles

Pith Artist
Ashles
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
8,694
Location
The '80s
My company's HR department is currently expressing an interest in using Psychometric Testing as part of its recruitment processes.

I am quite opposed to this as I do not see how it can be consistently and prefessionally applied in recruitment procedure by non-professionals. (How effective it is when properly applied by prefessionals in controlled environments is another issue which I'm not looking at here).

HR will not be controlling for environment, time of day, mood, comparability of other applicants, type of test usage etc.
And how accurately will HR members be able to analyse and interpret the given results?

The way I see it either too much weight is given to these tests (which everyone seems to agree is undesirable) or to little in which case all the usual recruitment techniques are utilised to the extent there seems to be no point in having the Psychometric testing at all.

Any thoughts either way?
 
If the people giving those tests are not properly trained in conducting the test and interpreting the results, it is useless. It may actually be worse than nothing.

Properly used, Psychometric testing can give useful clues to the personality type of a person, and some of their mental strengths and weaknesses. However, it must never be used as anything but a supplement to a personal interview.

Best regards, Hans
 
I may be involved in the testing and decision as to whether to implement these tests in the company.

Do you know if there are any good resources on the subject (other than the reams of positive data produced by the companies themselves).

Any objective testings in a recruitment type environment?

I basically would like to be able to go back to HR with some material.

I remember Psychometric Testing in job interviews being rather looked down upon by my lecturers but I can't remember if they detailed any particular studies.
 
Ashles said:
My company's HR department is currently expressing an interest in using Psychometric Testing as part of its recruitment processes.

I am quite opposed to this as I do not see how it can be consistently and prefessionally applied in recruitment procedure by non-professionals. (How effective it is when properly applied by prefessionals in controlled environments is another issue which I'm not looking at here).

HR will not be controlling for environment, time of day, mood, comparability of other applicants, type of test usage etc.
And how accurately will HR members be able to analyse and interpret the given results?

The way I see it either too much weight is given to these tests (which everyone seems to agree is undesirable) or to little in which case all the usual recruitment techniques are utilised to the extent there seems to be no point in having the Psychometric testing at all.

Any thoughts either way?
Click to expand...
I would suggest to the senior members of the HR department (and the company) that you run a (blinded) trial where they (the senior staff) are tested for their suitability for employment. You could say have 5 people tested for their suitability and ranked for each of their 5 jobs.

If they like the results and feel them beneficial they could then go forward. When it mismatches the people and their posts they might have second thoughts.
 
Lothian said:
I would suggest to the senior members of the HR department (and the company) that you run a (blinded) trial where they (the senior staff) are tested for their suitability for employment. You could say have 5 people tested for their suitability and ranked for each of their 5 jobs.

If they like the results and feel them beneficial they could then go forward. When it mismatches the people and their posts they might have second thoughts.
Click to expand...

I agree - I had already mentioned a similar test - I suggested at least 8 taken from a variety of levels and positions around the company.

If this goes ahead I'll keep everyone posted.
 
Concurrent validation is fine but if the test has been around for awhile it's probably not necessary. Look at the test manuals too see how well they predict.

Also, most tests packaged for employment testing assume that the test-givers have little knowledge of psychometrics. It's not a problem as long as the simple instructions in the test manual are followed.
 
bpesta22 said:
Concurrent validation is fine but if the test has been around for awhile it's probably not necessary. Look at the test manuals too see how well they predict.

Also, most tests packaged for employment testing assume that the test-givers have little knowledge of psychometrics. It's not a problem as long as the simple instructions in the test manual are followed.
Click to expand...

In what way is it 'not a problem' - are there studies that show the efficacy of Psychometric testing irrelevevent to the skills of the tester?

Which tests and which studies?
 
It really depends on the test. www.skepdic.com has info on the Myers-Briggs and eneagram tests (maybe others), they are indistinguishable from astrology. I definitely would not rely on manufacturers' literature. However, if they cite original publications, you can go to a college/U library and search for those papers in "Science Citation Index" to see who cited those papers, preferably, review articles. You might even scout the school's psychology department for a talkative person who can point you to an authoritative text.
 
Beware the Myers Briggs. Management loves it; but the research is sketchy at best. The suggestion is to use it for "developmental purposes" but not employment decisions.

I do think test manuals for standardized tests would be accurate sources of info about the test's validity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom