Discussion
Recruitment process
The first step in any recruitment process is determining the needs of the organisation. This involves analysing the vacant position in terms of the competencies and experience required. This information is used to develop a job description that reflects these requirements accurately and succinctly. Once the job description has been developed, the next step in effective hiring is to find and evaluate candidates by exploiting available recruiting methods and sources. Developing a shortlist involves reviewing applications and resumes, then measuring the relevance of the applicant’s skills and experience against the requirements of the job description (Luszez, M. L. & Kleiner, B. H., 2000). Once a short list is produced the interview process is determined by establishing what grading mechanisms will be used to differentiate candidates. The interview process is the most important step in candidate selection and can utilise a broad range of tools including reference checking, structured interviews, panel interviews, behavioural questions, psychometric testing and skills testing.
Types of tests and grading mechanisms available
Traditional information gathering tools used in the recruitment process include application forms, which are primarily used to gather personal particulars, and life history that is used to develop interview questions. Interviews are the most widely used selection instrument, ranging from a structured to ad hoc approach. Reference checks are conducted to measure the judgements of previous employers or supervisors. Some applications require candidates to send in copies of academic transcripts showing performance in secondary or tertiary education. Traditional psychometric testing consists of pen and paper tests ranging from general intelligence to personality inventories.
More recently, some testing methods have moved out of the laboratory and into commercial employment. These methods include assessment centres where candidates are required to participate in a set of simulations which represent the demands of a job, and the behaviours exhibited are evaluated by carefully trained assessors in terms of job related skills (Frank & Jaffee, 1995). Computerised testing includes computerised personality tests and computerised interviews. It has the advantage of scheduling ease and immediacy of feedback. Video based training takes computerised testing a step further as it blends the technologies of video, computer and simulation. Participants are presented with video depictions of work related situations and must choose between appropriate courses of action. To make the items fair to all groups, that is less reading dependent. The choices to each question are actually dramatically acted out on screen and to make the test more lifelike and challenging instead of having one correct and three incorrect choices, the choices are scaled in terms of degree of correctness (Frank & Jaffee, 1995).
Integrated Group Ltd approach
Integrated Group is a labour hire agency that grew out of a blue-collar temp agency in Western Australia in 1992 to a national employment services agency that now supplies temporary and permanent labour to a variety of industry sectors. Integrateds’ core business has remained blue collar and to a lesser extent office support labour hire and recruitment. Integrated maintains a comprehensive recruitment process including application forms, reference checks, interview and safety inductions. This process in itself has grown from a 30-minute process 10 years ago into a 3-hour process today. Recently the company has introduced various testing platforms that include:
- Qwiz skill testing for typing and Microsoft Office packages for all office support candidates
- SHL Work Instructions tests for all industrial candidates; and
- Test Grid Apollo and Emotional Intelligence online questionnaires for supervisory and managerial positions.
Procedures manuals and quality systems mean that the company is now very inflexible when it comes to when the tests should be administered and to whom.
A permanent recruitment consultant from Integrated Group Ltd rates testing of candidates as value adding only at certain times in the market. When there is an abundance of candidates and other screening methods don’t allow you to choose a successful candidate, testing provides an additional selection tool by which to rank otherwise evenly matched candidates. In a candidate driven market such as the current trades shortage in Western Australia, traditional screening methods allow easy differentiation and selection of candidates (D. Cann, Personal Communication, August 5, 2004).
Personality testing of existing employees is a good way for companies to set a benchmark using existing employees to understand what traits fit well with particular roles, and use this as a measuring “stick” against future applicants. It is easy to over rely on testing in the recruitment process and base selection decisions on the results. A personality test should not be the sole tool used for selection instead personality testing should be used as part of a holistic recruitment testing (N. Di Ciano, Partner MSA Recruitment, Personal Communication, August 13, 2004).
Strengths of Psychometric and Skills tests
Psychometric and skills tests are the most objective of all recruitment methods. An applicant can try and fake it, but a reliable questionnaire will pick up inconsistencies. More manipulation occurs at the CV level where candidates can easily extend the period of or close gaps in their work history. Dalen, Stanton, & Roberts, (2001) conducted an investigation into the extent to which it is possible to fake a personality questionnaire to match the ideal candidates profile. The results of the study showed that all candidates were unable to falsify their responses to match the ideal profile for the job. This was due to individuals selectively being able to manipulate their response on scales rather than inflating all scales.
Skills testing for tangible abilities and competencies are extremely useful in screening candidates that do not meet the inherent requirements of the position. Welding tests for welders, typing tests for secretarial roles as well as Microsoft Office tests for office support roles allow the recruiter to use objective measurements in order to gauge the candidates suitability for certain positions. In fact, employers often state the benchmark, which must be achieved such as advanced word ability or 65 words per minute typing ability. In certain cases safety is the basis behind set standards. For example an employer may require a welder to be able to produce a weld to engineering specifications. The welder is sent for a weld test, the weld produced is then sent off for radiological tests and compliance is assessed.
Rising popularity of Psychometric and Skills tests
The fast paced nature of the recruitment industry means that at Integrated, tests are frequently conducted under conditions that are far from optimal. This includes conducting the tests in cramped rooms with high levels of background noise and interruptions. Sometimes the test administrator may be caught up and accidentally allow candidates 15 minutes or more for a 12-minute test. In addition, at the conclusion of the process, candidates are more often than not provided with little or no feedback on their performance. Baker & Cooper (1995) found that the main use of tests in recruitment was for making a candidate selection decision. The implications of this finding are that if there are malpractices/non standardised testing conditions in the organisation, this extent of usage in selection decision is. of concern. In fact, some employers are using tests in a way that could seriously disadvantage some participants. This adverse impact can in some situations be aligned with indirect discrimination relating to sex or race . In certain situations assessment processes may negatively affect candidates in terms of their psychological wellbeing and their possibility of subsequent attitudes towards testing and the organisation. Evidence also exists that reactions to the assessment process mediate eventual attitudes and behaviour following the assessment process (Baker & Cooper, 1995). In addition, Baker et al. (1995) found that the way that people are prepared prior to assessment and the feedback/ counselling received post assessment is important in determining a candidates positive or negative view of the company. In summary the potential for the occurrence of a variety of adverse effects is increased if principles of good practice are ignored when administering skills and psychometric tests.
The growth in the use of psychometric and skills tests requires explanation. For the same reason there has been an increase in the outsourcing of recruitment to recruitment firms, tests are now marketed in a much more active fashion by commercial test producers. The tests are treated as another consumable, attractively presented and subjected to the same marketing ingenuity as other items of mass consumption. It is expensive for consulting companies to invest the time to understand the business and customize the product and so generally off the shelf products are presented. It should be questioned as to how well the consultant could understand the context the business operates in and the needs of its internal customers. At the end of the day the consultant is there to sell your business a solution whether it fits the organisation or not.
There is a need to focus more specifically on the way in which tests are being used within companies. This should be analysed by an independent or in-house authority with no ties or allegiance to key players in order to develop an impartial testing methodology that is both fair and valid (Baker & Cooper, 1995). A solution to this problem would be to instead, invest in an in-house psychologist to properly analyse the needs of internal customers and the context the business operates with-in. This would enlist a neutral and objective professional whose allegiances lie hopefully to the best interests of the company and would hopefully produce a more valid solution.
Context Validity of Psychometric and Skills tests
The biggest problem is not the tests themselves because academic professionals have invested in many years of study and research, including, successful tests of validity and reliability to develop them. The biggest problem is the application of these tests, often in the wrong context or by untrained recruiters who do not completely understand what the test is measuring (Luszez, & Kleiner, 2000). Baker, & Cooper (1995) investigated whether tests used by employers actually sampled or measured the personal attributes they wished to measure in an effective way. They showed that 15% of test users did not, this failure to check alignment of the test to the qualities being sought is problematic since it may be difficult to show that the test is measuring qualities directly related to effective performance or genuine occupational requirements. This is one of the factors that can lead to complaints of indirect discrimination. This study also investigated the validity of testing in predicting success or failure. The validity of the test is crucial if it is to be worthwhile and serve both the interests of the employer and test takers. Using a test with low demonstratable validity can lead to selection decisions, which disadvantage both parties and are potentially costly. Individuals may be rejected when they are entirely suitable and conversely may be accepted when they are unsuitable.
For example, Integrated insist that recruitment consultants conduct a 12-minute work instructions test for all blue-collar workers. This would include a tradesman with certified trade papers who has a solid work history and two good references from previous employers. The context that the individual is been employed under is to carry out the same trade skills that the individual has been carrying out in some cases for 20 or 30 years. This is one example of bad practice where the candidate feels that his time has been wasted and the extra test conducted contributes nothing to the recruitment process. At a time when tradesman are a valuable and sought after commodity organisations cannot afford to mistreat individuals with these sort of specialised skills.
Dakin, Nilakant, & Jensen (1994) examined the validity of personality testing and argue that it is not possible to determine whether there were consistent, meaningful relationships between particular traits and performance criteria in different occupations. Furthermore, they show that there are differential relationships between personality dimensions and performance criteria. This result highlights the limitations of trying to determine the overall validity of personality tests as a predictor. The results indicate that, given the need to align personality traits with different occupational requirements, a likely reason for the low validity of personality tests is that current test batteries measure the wrong things. Overall this tells us that if personality testing is to be helpful it is incumbent on the employer to identify first characteristics of the job which are important, then identify personality traits which are relevant to those characteristics, and, finally, place greatest weight on those scales when interpreting test results.
Conclusion
The battery of tests given to candidates in recruitment for non-executive positions should be fair, equitable and contribute meaningful information to the final selection decision. Conducting testing purely for the sake of it is a waste of time and money. If it is decided to conduct testing, it is best to specifically determine the reason and the objectives for doing so. (Luszez & Kleiner, 2000). Skills tests are useful for measuring tangible abilities and competencies directly related to the job requirements. In addition the testing should be administered and similarly, if required, interpreted by suitably trained persons. In the low margin high volume market of blue-collar recruitment, personal factors such as reliability and loyalty would be much more valued traits than written English comprehension. The administration of a twelve-minute test does not produce a valuable return on investment when the individual is a casual employee who may work for the organisation for only one day.
It seems Integrated, for the most part, is still in the dark ages with respect to critical issues relating to candidate testing. Archaic paper and pencil tests are used which have little to do with the context that the candidate will be operating in. In addition, due to high internal turnover, consultants conduct interviews with little training in how to ask probing questions and get the important information out of an interview, which is deemed essential by Frank & Jaffee, 1995. The dangerous result of these factors is an over reliance on test scores that may not measure the right areas.
Finally, personality tests may be much more effectively used as a means of structuring an interview, rather than as a single predictor. Indeed several of the respondents in the Dakin et al. (1994) study reported that they used personality testing as a tool during interviews. They provide the results to the candidate, explaining what the client company was looking for. The results are then discussed and a careful exploration made of variances between the individual’s results and the clients expectations. This application provides a much fairer use of testing during the selection process. In conclusion for testing to be useful and fair it should be directly relevant to the job specifications and measure critical competencies essential for the successful performance of the job.
References
Baker, B. R. & Cooper, J. N. (1995). Fair play or foul? Personnel Review, 24, 3-18.
Dalen, L. H., Stanton, N. A. & Roberts, A. D. (2001). Faking personality questionaires in personnel selection. Journal of Management and development, 20, 729-741.
Dakin, S., Nilakant, V. & Jensen, R. (1994). The role of Personality in Managerial Selection. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 9, 3-11.
Frank, F.D. & Jaffee, C. L. (1995) Training and development are not enough. Journal of Management Development, 14, 51-55.
Frankenfield, G. & Kleiner, B. H. (2000). Effective Employment Screening Practices. Management Reasearch News, 23,7/8, 24-29.
Lievens, F., Van Dam, K. & Anderson, N. (2002). Recent trends and challenges in personnel selection. Personnel Review, 31, 580-601.
Luszez, M. A. & Kleiner, B. H. (2000) How to Hire Employees Effectively. Management Reearch News, 23,12, 19-26.
Terpstra, D. E. (1994). HRM: A Key to Competitiveness. Management Decision, 32, 11-14.
