The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (March 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Employment testing is the practice of administering written, oral, or other tests as a means of determining the suitability or desirability of a job applicant. The premise is that if scores on a test correlate with job performance, then it is economically useful for the employer to select employees based on scores from that test.

Legal context (United States)

The United States Supreme Court has decided several cases clarifying the place of employment testing in the context of discrimination law. In particular, these cases have addressed the discriminatory use of tests when promoting employees by requiring tests beyond the education required for the job. A central finding in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. was that the employer must demonstrate (or be prepared to demonstrate) that its selection process is related to the job being filled.[1]

Test types

Different types of assessments may be used for employment testing, including personality tests, intelligence tests, work samples, and assessment centers. Some correlate better with job performance than with others; employers may use more than one.

Performance assessment tests

Performance-based assessment testing is a process to find out if applicants can do the job for which they are applying. It is done through tests, which are directly administered and judged by hiring managers who will be supervising the potential hire.

The tests are peer-to-peer and reflect real business tasks that candidates have to perform, should they be selected for the role. The tests are open ended, time bound, business related questions which applicants need to submit their responses for in order to prove their abilities.

Personality tests

Some employers [2][3] select staff using personality tests.

Researchers have tested the commonly-used Big Five personality traits (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism). Conscientiousness positively correlates with job performance for all occupations, as found by meta analyses;[4][5][6] an analysis of 36 studies [7] found the same for conscientiousness but also for neuroticism.

However, other factors of personality can correlate with non-traditional aspects of job performance, such as leadership and effectiveness in a team environment.[8] The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is also used.

The Great Eight is a proposed model of competencies.[9] An analysis of 29 studies [10] found personality tests that suggest an employee had a particular 'great eight' competency were positively correlated with their actual performance in that competency.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is a highly validated psychopathology test that is generally used in a clinical psychology setting and may reveal potential mental health disorders.[11] However, this can be considered by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as the employer having knowledge of a medical condition prior to an offer of employment. This is an illegal basis for a hiring decision in the United States. Employers considering personality tests should focus on tests designed for job purposes and do not provide any information regarding an applicant's mental health or stability.

Notable situations in which the MMPI may be used are in final selection for police officers, fire fighters, and other security and emergency personnel, especially when the employees are required to carry weapons. An assessment of mental stability and fitness can be reasonably related and necessary in the performance of the job.

Employment integrity testing is used to determine an applicant's honesty and integrity. A large meta-analysis found relatively strong correlations between integrity tests and job performance.[6]

Candidates may lie on personality tests in order to improve their chances of being selected, as found an analysis of 33 studies;[12] though it is argued that assessors should see lying in this case as a good thing for being socially adaptive.[13]

General and cognitive ability tests

Tests of cognitive ability can assess general intelligence and correlate very highly with overall job performance.[14] Individuals with higher levels of cognitive ability tend to perform better on their jobs. This is especially true for jobs that are particularly intellectually demanding.

A large meta-analysis of a range of different tests found its strongest positive correlations to job performance from tests of general mental ability.[6]

A study of 12 companies found scores for mathematics were associated with improved employee retention after 12 months, but not for scores of other measures including locating information, observing, reading, etc.[15]

Job-knowledge tests

Employers administer job-knowledge tests when applicants must already possess a body of knowledge before being hired.[16] Job-knowledge tests are particularly useful when applicants must have specialized or technical knowledge that can only be acquired through extensive experience or training. Job-knowledge tests are commonly used in fields such as computer programming, law, financial management, and electrical or mechanical maintenance.

Licensing exams and certification programs are also types of job-knowledge tests. Passing such exams indicates competence in the exam's subject area. Tests must be representative of the tested field, otherwise, litigation can be brought against the test-giver.

Situational judgment tests

Situational judgment tests are commonly used as employee-selection and employee-screening tools and have been developed to predict employment success.[17] These tests present realistic hypothetical scenarios in a multiple-choice format. Applicants are asked to state what they would do in a difficult job-related situation.[18]

Situational judgment tests measure the suitability of job applicants by assessing attributes such as problem solving, service orientation, and striving for achievement.[19]

Limitations

Much of the research done on such tests is correlational. Psychology research typically sets a relatively low threshold when deciding if a correlation is strong or weak. Many follow a precedent of 50% being a strong correlation - though results are rarely even that high[20] - when outside of psychology a strong correlation is often said to be above 80%.[21] Correlational work brings other issues. It may indicate employees with strong test scores perform better on their job but not how much better. Also correlation does not imply causation.

Researchers have raised concerns that potential candidates may see a given testing method as a negative reflection on the company. This may dissuade them from applying, depriving the company of good candidates, and they may tell others of their negative experience, hurting the company's reputation.[22]

See also

References

  1. ^ Griggs v. Duke Power Co. :401 U.S. 424 (1971)
  2. ^ "Share of HR professionals using pre-hire assessments worldwide in 2017, by type". Statista. 2017. Retrieved 24 July 2023.
  3. ^ "2022 North American Candidate Experience Benchmark Research Report" (PDF). Talent Board. 2022. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 July 2023. Retrieved 24 July 2023.
  4. ^ Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
  5. ^ Hurtz, Gregory (2000). "Personality and Job Performance: The Big Five Revisited". Journal of Applied Psychology. 85 (6): 869–879. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.869. PMID 11125652 – via ResearchGate.
  6. ^ a b c Schmidt, Frank (1998). "The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology: Practical and Theoretical Implications of 85 Years of Research Findings". Psychological Bulletin. 124 (2): 262–274. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262. S2CID 16429503 – via ResearchGate.
  7. ^ Salgado, Jesus (1997). "The Five Factor Model of Personality and Job Performance in the European Community". Journal of Applied Psychology. 82 (1): 30–43. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.1.30. PMID 9119797 – via ResearchGate.
  8. ^ Hogan, R. (2006). Personality and the fate of organizations.
  9. ^ Kurz, Rainer (2002). Organizational Effectiveness: The Role of Psychology. Chichester: Wiley. pp. 227–255. ISBN 9780471492641.
  10. ^ Bartram, Dave (2005). "The Great Eight Competencies: A Criterion-Centric Approach to Validation". Journal of Applied Psychology. 90 (6): 1185–1203. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1185. PMID 16316273 – via ResearchGate.
  11. ^ Official MMPI-2 Description
  12. ^ Birkeland, Scott (2006). "A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Job Applicant Faking on Personality Measures". International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 14 (4): 317–335. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00354.x. S2CID 142178923 – via academia.edu.
  13. ^ MORGESON, FREDERICK (2007). "Reconsidering the Use of Personality Tests in Personnel Selection Contexts". Personnel Psychology. 60 (3): 683–729. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00089.x – via ResearchGate.
  14. ^ Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J. (2004). General Mental Ability in the World of Work: Occupational Attainment and Job Performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 162–173.[1] Archived 2008-10-14 at the Wayback Machine
  15. ^ Hendrick, Ruth (2006). "EVALUATING WORK KEYS PROFILING AS A PRE-EMPLOYMENT ASSESSMENT TOOL TO INCREASE EMPLOYEE RETENTION". Old Dominion University.
  16. ^ U.S. Office of Personnel Management "Assessment Decision Guide". Retrieved on 2008-08-14.
  17. ^ Ployhart, R. E. (2006). Staffing in the 21st century: New challenges and strategic opportunities. Journal of Management, 32, 868-897.
  18. ^ Lievens, F., Peeters, H., & Schollaert, E. (2008). Situational judgment tests: A review of recent research. Personnel Review, 37, 426-441.
  19. ^ Whetzel, D. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2009). Situational judgment tests: An overview of current research. Human Resource Management Review, 19, 188-202.
  20. ^ Pierce, Charles (2015). "Correlational Effect Size Benchmarks". Journal of Applied Psychology. 100 (2): 431–449. doi:10.1037/a0038047. PMID 25314367 – via Academia.edu.
  21. ^ "Strength of Correlation". Newcastle University. 24 July 2023.
  22. ^ Ekuma, Kelechi (2012). "The Importance of Predictive and Face Validity in Employee Selection and Ways of Maximizing Them: An Assessment of Three Selection Methods". International Journal of Business and Management. 7 (22): 115–122. doi:10.5539/IJBM.V7N22P115. S2CID 154291666.
Categories