'Personality assessment has been used for some time now in personnel selection.' Critically discuss the methods and merits of personality assessment. In light of your evaluation, which method would be the most valuable in personnel selection.

from the data, a model is used known as the “Big Five”. The main aspects of

the model include:

• Openness
• Conscientiousness
• Extroversion
• Agreeableness
• Neuroticism.

The aim of my essay is to discuss in great depth about the different methods

of personnel selection used and how effective and efficient they can be on

influencing an employer ‘s decision. I also intend to examine different job

categories and how an employer would select the best method of personality

selection to suit that career.

I will achieve the aim through an analysis of the four most widely used

methods, and how traits can be established through areas of personality

assessment. I will also achieve this by relating facts from various job

descriptions and compare the advantage and disadvantages of each method.

A Greater Understanding of Interviews 

Within the method of an interview an individual’s personality can be

characterised very directly and produce a more ‘get to know you’ basis.

Employers have been using these methods for many years and have been

proven to be quite effective in choosing a suitable employee. Although in

many circumstances this is not the only method used, it can be often used in

conjunction with another personality test. When conducting an interview, the

conductor is not just an observer. They play a positive role, which should

push them to ask questions that they would have experienced through their

role and would wish upon the future employee.

In the work of Harry Stack Sullivan, it is described that intonations can

describe aspects of personality. With this, it is shown that rate of speech and

other expressive behaviour are factors in finding a persons inner-structure. 

Through this knowledge it can be related back toward personnel interviews,

as it follows the same structure and pushes to find attitudinal aspects of the

interviewee. As this method takes a more direct approach, it can give the

interviewer a better insight into the dominant motives and aspirations

underlying in their personality. 

Due to interviews being constantly used, they have evolved into one of the

most efficient means to capturing an individual’s inner character. Due to this

evolution, the aspect of a interview can be split into two areas. The most

commonly used for personnel selection is an Unstructured interview. In

this process the interviewer gives the individual a chance to express their

ideas and portray a sense of their personality by using their own means.  A

Structured interview on the other hand is more focused on a procedural

diagnosis, it follows a specific quota and is scaled to give a simpler overall

outlook on a person’s personality.

The use of interviews can grasp a first hand look at a person’s individualism

and pin points their most dominant traits to fit the desired job description.

This method ensures that certain questions can be asked to achieve the

desired description, in which they need to fulfil that certain role. This method

is also great for rating people in the “Big Five”, as it explores a persons

identity in depth. An employer can base their one-on-one questions to suit

this model, therefore it will ensure results on paper and gain a first hand

insight to on an individuals personality. Although the interview seems to be

very effective, it can also be shown to be very ineffective. The term “making

a good impression” is a continually conveyed aspect of the method. Whether

it being the way they act or their professional appearance, it gives the

interviewer an overall impression from the start and will place a negative or

positive imprint for rest of the interview. Personality is not always a factor

in an interview.

A Greater Understanding of Observation

        Observation is not as widely used as the other personality assessments,

but can play an essential role if used in conjunction with other methods. It

involves observing an individual’s behaviour in a certain environment to gain

an insight on their personality. The best means to approach observation in an

interview is to observe that person in a direct approach. Although, this

process can be seen as very time consuming and an interviewer cannot watch

the person all day. A means within this method is Analogue Behavioural

Observation, which in fact sets up a life like situation that will relate to the

job. 

The Analogue Behavioural Observation test gives a good reference into a

persons behaviours and the personality they display throughout the

exercise. This exercise can be considered to be more effective and accurate

when there are two interviewers. The data collected from observation can be

better understood and expanded if it is used with another source such as

interviews. As observation on its own doesn’t perceive a person’s hidden

characteristics of personality, only those exerted in the observation, which

cannot portray all of a person’s traits.  

Observations for personnel selection is probably not the most effective and

efficient means out of the four and doesn’t relate strongly to defining traits

within the “Big Five”. The “Big Five” has many traits to explore which in

turn would exonerate the efforts of an observation test. Therefore I see this

test as one that would prove to have a totality of inefficiency within its

structure and somewhat useless towards personnel selection.

A Greater Understanding of Objective Tests

The use of objective tests in recent times has made them become one

of the most widely used, which has forged them into very efficient and

effective methods for personnel selection. The format involves either a true

or false fixture, or multiple-choice quizzes that describe certain behaviours

and feelings of a subject’s inner working. It promotes a limited response

range and ensures an answer in all aspects of the “Big Five”. These tests

are ideal for assessing traits of an individual and for assessing distinctive

areas of a person’s every day situations.

In relation to personnel selection, the demand for such tests has become quite

big in many businesses and has proved to be a quite an effective tool in

selecting the best personality for the job. The inventories are also very good

as they limit the responses of an individual so they can correlate with the

selected traits for the position. Because of the limited response questions it

promotes its own downfalls. The test runs on an honesty basis, which cannot

guarantee true answers. In 1920 Woodworth created a data sheet which

required prospect military personnel to tick yes or no answers on specific

questions. One question that was used, asked if they wet the bed, obviously

reasons such as the embarrassment of the topic showed that the honesty

factor was thrown out the window. This showing that even the most

commonly used method can in fact have a serious downfall.

In 1943 a new test had arose, which had a main focus on removing

Woodworth’s problem areas. The MMPI or the Minnesota Multiphasic

Personality Inventory followed a different structure that allowed personnel to

choose between three responses, True, False or cannot say. This seemed to

be the test that grasped the traits of personality most efficiently, until varying

results from several different ethical backgrounds proved to be very

different. The test was culturally biased. Because this was the case in 1989,

a revision of the test promoted a broader spectrum of questions that would

compensate for different backgrounds.

In relation to Objective Tests, they seem to be a good indicator for judging

traits to base a person’s personality. If this were used in personnel selection

the individual taking the test would have a minimal chance of succeeding

through cheating, as there is a validity scale designed to detect such

behaviour. Due to the fact that there are 567 questions, you would be sure to

get random responses with no formed correlation. I think to gain the

maximum results for finding the bulk of an individuals persona, you would

have to involve another test (eg Interview, Observation or a Projective test)

to back up the information from the objective test.

A Greater Understanding of Projective Tests

Projective tests can be seen as a reflection of the unconscious reacting

to an equivocal stimuli, therefore creating a response of their feelings and

needs. If used correctly these tests can look deeply into personality traits as

it lets the subject explore their own ideas and then expand on them. The test

is seen as very indirect and pushes the individual to expand further, this

means that there will be no clear-cut response, therefore promoting diversity

of answers. Due to the more complex structure compared to interviews or

observations, some professionals have seen the test as inconclusive as it is

based around assumption. This is also a test that should be used in

conjunction with another test, as it needs to relate its findings to another

source.  

The projective test is split into two differently structured ambiguous picture

showings, one known as the Rorschach Inkblot Test and the other the TAT

(Thematic Apperception Test). These tests are predominantly used for

clinical use and subject to much criticism if used for personnel selection. In  

1921 Hermann Rorschach invented the Rorschach Inkblot test that comprised

a series of ten cards that entails a blot of ink on paper. The cards are shown

to an individual and then asked to examine the card so they can give a

possible explanation of what they think the blot represents. This pushes out

many symbolic possibilities, which can result in the finding of particular

traits. This style of personality assessment pushed Henry Murray in 1938,

to come up with his own projective test known as the TAT. This test also

consists of equivocal stimuli and also promotes the individual to give an in

depth analysis of the picture. The pictures are designed more for determining

traits, as the pictures show people in unexplained circumstances therefore

pushing the individual to make up their own scenario.

If choosing from the two for determining the best test for personnel

assessment, the TAT would be the best as it gives a more realistic feel and

would grant less leeway for lying about answers. This test also can cover a

majority of the “Big Five”, but would need the extra influence from another

test to gain the best personality perspective. The test would still lack the one

on one with an employer, as a highly trained psychologist should conduct the

test.

Conclusion

Due to personality’s diversity, it is hard to determine an individual

personality just through a test. The concepts of all the tests draw their own

traits and conclusions, but non-of the tests solely draw all traits effectively

and efficiently.  

The positive aspect of all the tests show that direct and indirect means of

assessment can draw aspects of a person’s inner-self . The need for such test

are vital for a business as right selection of an employee based on personality

can reveal a person abilities and interests, and open the door for interpersonal

traits that are needed for certain job areas.

Overall I see it as necessary to not use just one test as it will not uncover all

underlying aspects of a person’s personality. The use of an interview and an

objective test would create the best possible chance to discover the full basis

of an individuals traits.

Bibliography

Burger, Jerry, Personality (6th Ed, Wadsworth/Thompson Learning, Belmont USA, 2002)

Saccuzzo, Denis P, Psychology: From Research to Applications (Allyn & Bacon Inc, Newton USA, 1987)

Matlin, Margaret W, Psychology (3rd Ed, Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Fortworth USA, 1999)

Matlin, Margaret W, Psychology (2nd Ed, Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Fortworth USA, 1992)

Huffman, Karen, Psychology in Action (7th Ed, John Wiley & sons Inc, Hoboken USA, 2004)

Myers, David G, Psychology (2nd Ed, Worth Publishers Inc, New York USA, 1989)

Aitken, LR, Personality Assessment Methods and Practices (3rd Ed, Department of Psychology, Pepperdine University, California, 1998)

Kimble, Garmezy and Zigler, principles of Psychology (6th Ed, Wadsworth, Belmont, 2000)

Hall, Lindzey and Campbell, Theories of Personality (4th Ed, John Wiley & Sons Inc, Canada, 1998)

Richards, Graham, Putting Psychology In Its Place (2nd Ed, Taylor & Francis Group, New York 2002)

Rathus, Spencer A, Essentials Of Psychology (5th Ed, Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Florida, 1985)

Westen, Drew, Psychology: Brain, Behavior, and Culture (3rd Ed, John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, 2002)

---