This method of testing can bring many advantages to organisations and employers, it is often commonly stated that this type of testing can to a certain extent produce a good degree of accurate information about an individuals personality and how they are likely to behave at work. This will allow employers to understand and relate to the workers as there is a common understanding and positive perception. The information collected helps determine an individual’s suitability for employment and provides a useful amount of quantitative data therefore allowing comparisons on set criteria.
According to (Mckenna, 2000 p171-3) these tests being scientific instruments have proved to be reliable, valid and allow distinction between individuals. The validity of the tests is also supported by (Drenth, 1978 P142) as he suggests that the tests can predict the future performance and behaviour of the individual which is predictive validity. Also the comprehensive data which is extracted from the tests help to relate to behavioural patterns, and further the results of the tests can be given back to the individuals allowing them to reflect on their personality. It can also be said that these tests are also found very useful for career advice and help people make choices in terms of there abilities, which can give them extra confidence when choosing a particular job. The tests are also fair because they prevent any type of corruption, favouritism and bias which can be evident in interview assessments.
A further strength of these tests as suggested by (Mckenna, 2000 p171-3) is that firms and organisations can refer to the data collected during the procedure of these tests, in order to identify and establish a relationship between the workplace performance and the test scores. Through this they are able to judge whether the tests are useful to use and can improve the management of workers. Also carrying out these test compared to interviews, for individuals can be less nerve-racking and they can perform better to put forward their qualities to employers. The tests are also easy to administer and some can be given and scored by the computer giving immediate results which can be less time consuming for employers and subjects.
However it can be argued that this type of assessment can have many drawbacks, which could lead to misleading results and prove to be a disadvantage for companies. Although it is a scientific test it can still be challenged in terms of its reliability as to whether they produce valid results on which people can be judged, a major problem is that they can be used in the wrong way. The tests can be manipulated by the individuals in which, they can fake their personalities. To do this they only guess what the employers require and create false impressions in order to secure themselves a job. The subjects can also lie and randomly select answers for personnel reasons and not take the test seriously. This can lead to negative effects and result in employers choosing unsuitable employees for the job and effect the firms data. However to avoid this some of the better tests tend to have built in mechanisms to guard against these errors. For example they can ask the same question in a variety of different ways and then look for major discrepancies.
The test can also be a disadvantage for ethnic minorities, especially if there first language is not English. Due to this, questions can be misread and misinterpreted producing faulty results, and giving some groups less chances of gaining jobs. Also cultural and educational backgrounds can have an effect on the test results. Further the participants in the tests may not be feeling well on a particular day, which can affect the way they perform, disadvantaging themselves and the company due to common errors. The procedure of the test can also make people anxious, and under pressure they can make irrational mistakes. The questions can also be misleading and sometimes be too simplistic for people to put there qualities forward.
To develop and utilise these psychometric tests a lot of money and effort is spent and in some cases it can be time-consuming depending on the format of the tests. Also according to (Mckenna, 2000 p171-3) people tend to have less self awareness therefore they cannot answer questions truthfully and reflect their true feelings. Many people don’t reflect much on there own personalities but rely on other people judgements, thus the performance in the tests can be low. Other negative effects of these tests is that when the results are collected, and if they are given to individuals as feedback it could knock their confidence, also employers cannot just rely on psychometric tests when recruiting staff. They need to have more cooperation with the individuals to judge their behaviour face to face.
There are also some ethical considerations need to be taken into account, which place limits on how much trust can be given to the results derived from the tests. These need to be focused on to avoid test bias and the need for confidentiality when using the results. Often when individuals know the reason for the test they can manipulate the test. Further the tests can prove to be disadvantage for ethnic minorities as previously suggested supported by Mckenna (2002). However if they are performed by well trained testers they can rule out any sexual and racial discrimination, which may be enforced by employers when personally interviewing staff.
In summary it can be argued that psychometric testing has both negative and positive features, it is important to look at both aspects. However from the research conducted there are more disadvantages of the test for companies, if not carried out well. If psychometric testing is properly used, it can be useful and could save time and money when recruiting staff. Industry insiders believe that if employers administer the right test properly it could be very advantageous. Due to its increase in popularity psychometric tests are now believed to be used by 2/3 of UK organisations in hiring staff, even though the use of this test is opposed by trade union congress as they dismiss them to be “gimmicky, unfair and a blunt instrument” which may increase laziness amongst employers (Guardian Newspaper March 2003 p2). The employers may not take the tests and the whole employment procedure seriously which could cause loss for organisations.
Further it can also be argued that the tests can never be totally free of inaccuracies in the same way as other methods of selection that are used such as interviews as they can also include bias and unfair treatment. Test producers themselves agree that it is quite possible to fake a psychometric test, thus they are not very reliable and produce inaccurate results. Also due to many simplistic questions people are unable to put forward their qualities in their own way. But there is no doubt that it is a valid way of assessing people if used in the right way, however it should be only part of the whole selection procedure. This is because it is hard to identify somebody through profiles and tests, but with more detailed analysis through an interview can make it easier to select an individual and make employee selection easier to get a better working environment.
REFERENCES
BOOKS
Arnold, J., I.T. Robertson, and C. L. Cooper. 1998 Work Psychology: Understanding Human Behaviour in the Workplace. 3rd edition: London
Mckenna, E. 2000. Business Psychology and Organisational Behaviour: A student’s Handbook. Third Edition. Psychology Press Ltd.
Warr, P. 1978. Psychology at Work. Harmondsworth: Penguin
NEWSPAPERS
Nationwide News p and y Limited, 2003, The Daily Telegraph, Australia and Sydney
Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2003, The Guardian London