Your thoughts on pre-employment personality testing

nietra

We have strgugled with this at work and especially after the recent rulings. Now I have to give a presentation for school so I'm asking for your thoughts as HR Professionals on pre-employment personality testing.

Thanks so much!!
Nietra

marc

We do not do personality testing for pre-employment purposes. It is my firmly held belief that the interview process should and can answer most questions regarding "fit" in an organization.


I do believe that these tests, especially the Meyers Briggs type tests, can provide insight as to why certain people have difficulty communicating - but even then, the value is limited, in my opinion.

LarryC

I would think that the reliability and validity of such tests would be determined by the extent to which personality traits directly apply to job functions. Such as being outgoing and gregerious rather than introverted and withdrawn if one is looking for work as a circus clown. However, Emmett Kelly blows THAT theory out the window. But, Neitra, I hope you see what I mean.

I more or less like to depend on what Southwest Airlines calls "relational competence" or how well somebody will carry a positive attitude and fit the culture of the organization.

My thoughts.

Parabeagle

I have worked for companies whose selection process ranges from simple reference and background checks to one company that required multiple interviews, pencil/paper personality profile, sometimes an in-basket exercise, and an "interview" with our industrial psychologist.

In my opinion, the use of personality profiling is no guarantee of an individual's success on the job. It may be useful in determining how you might want to motivate or coach them once they're on board, but I don't think they're a reliable predictor of how well the person will do.

A cautionary note: Stay away from the MMPI. It was the subject of an article on this site a few weeks ago. It doesn't just measure preferences but rather also gets into psychological makeup, etc. and the courts weren't very happy about that.

LivindonSouth

This one has been discussed quite a few times with opinions ranging from A to Z. I say there are very few, if any, people in HR who have the ability/training to properly interpret the results of such instruments and having those results offers greater exposure than having no selection tools at all.

An instrument that rates a candidate's propensity for honesty or gives an estimate of their proximity in profile with those successful in the occupation....those are one thing. Instruments such as personality tests are most frequently administered by licensed technicians and are used by licenced clinicians such as psychologists and phychiatrists and the results have no business on an HR desk. Or worse, on the desk of a CEO. Chances are you cannot get your hands on those instruments anyway.

SMace

It's just like anything. If you are going to do it, do it right. Having a pre-employment physical just for the sake of having one is wrong. It must serve a purpose. If it doesn't fix it or get rid of it.

There are companies that use personality profiling (or whatever the hell the latest buzzword is) and are VERY successful doing it. Nucor Steel is an example of one such company.

LivindonSouth

They hired my neighbor as their Controller here. Please don't tell me it was based on a personality test!

LarryC

Somehow, personality and Controller don't seem to go together.

LivindonSouth

I'm praying that Marc won't see this; but, it's my understanding that Nucor required that the Controller finalists actually have no personality. In that regard, I think the tool worked quite well.

marc

The PLAN is working.

HRCalico

I appear to be in the minority on this - we use a 12 minute test called the Wonderlic (not a personality or profile test, more of a logic test). The scores are only one tool we use to evaluate interviewees, we still consider the interview to be much more important. (taken directly from the speel I give them before the test.) I feel we have somewhat of a handle on interpreting the scores and are aware of the exceptions that exist. For example, I prefer to see a 15-18 for production workers. One guy scored a 7 and is one of our better workers. Another two guys scored in the mid to upper 30s and neither one worked out.

Gillian3

Take great care. Many of the instruments that are used were'nt developed for employment purposes but for counseling, aptitude testing for inmates (true) and for other diagnostic purposes. The test subjects were may not have been typical employees, so suggested passing rates, norms etc are there for other purposes than employment. The best tests are those developed by a psychologist who specializes in employment testing who has developed the test for a specific company. I guess as a bubble buster, HRCalico, you should read the Duke Power decision. The Wonderlic was ruled to be an invalid predictor of performance in that particular case, regardless of all the hype.