Scrap These STUPID Psychometric Tests!

Truegho

Why are so many of these employers using these utterly RIDICULOUS psychometric questionnaires when recruiting?

These damned things are making it harder for people to get a job. The government should scrap them and order these firms to return to more sensible methods of recruiting.

Googlewhacker

They are making it harder for people that companies don't want.....which is kind of the point of them.

Oldernotwiser

Oh good grief - not again!!

suited-aces

Truegho wrote: »

Why are so many of these employers using these utterly RIDICULOUS psychometric questionnaires when recruiting?

These damned things are making it harder for people to get a job. The government should scrap them and order these firms to return to more sensible methods of recruiting.

Explain? The presence or absence of test surely won't impact on the number of people unemployed or the number of jobs going? (well, except for a few more jobs with psychometric testers, which will technically make it easier to get one...?)

DVardysShadow

Psychometric tests are nothing to do with suitability for the post and everything to do with the employer buying snake oil from the consultant who administers the test. I have been the 'victim' of psychometric tests more than once - on one occasion in the most bizarre way. I actually outwitted one set of tests and got a job I wanted - and another set which I 'failed' I now feel has given me a better outcome
.
It seems that employers like to - or sometimes are forced to - accept this approach to recruitment selection - but in the long run, the employer will wise up to the consultant playing games such as rejecting the maximum number of candidates in order to maximise the testing fees.

Usually, psychometric testing is

• based on the false premise that some people are born to do a particular role
• a fig leaf for the fact that if the employer really understood what the job required and had a capable training function which understood how to train, they would get better results by selecting candidates on traditional lines and training appropriately.

Your options are

• outwit the psychometric testing process
• accept that you are better off not working for an employer who likes to buy snake oil from consultants

Googlewhacker

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Psychometric tests are nothing to do with suitability for the post and everything to do with the employer buying snake oil from the consultant who administers the test. I have been the 'victim' of psychometric tests more than once - on one occasion in the most bizarre way. I actually outwitted one set of tests and got a job I wanted - and another set which I 'failed' I now feel has given me a better outcome
.
It seems that employers like to - or sometimes are forced to - accept this approach to recruitment selection - but in the long run, the employer will wise up to the consultant playing games such as rejecting the maximum number of candidates in order to maximise the testing fees.

Usually, psychometric testing is

• based on the false premise that some people are born to do a particular role
• a fig leaf for the fact that if the employer really understood what the job required and had a capable training function which understood how to train, they would get better results by selecting candidates on traditional lines and training appropriately.

Your options are

• outwit the psychometric testing process
• accept that you are better off not working for an employer who likes to buy snake oil from consultants

A fan of them then

Uncertain

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Psychometric tests are nothing to do with suitability for the post and everything to do with the employer buying snake oil from the consultant who administers the test. I have been the 'victim' of psychometric tests more than once - on one occasion in the most bizarre way. I actually outwitted one set of tests and got a job I wanted - and another set which I 'failed' I now feel has given me a better outcome
.
It seems that employers like to - or sometimes are forced to - accept this approach to recruitment selection - but in the long run, the employer will wise up to the consultant playing games such as rejecting the maximum number of candidates in order to maximise the testing fees.

Usually, psychometric testing is

• based on the false premise that some people are born to do a particular role
• a fig leaf for the fact that if the employer really understood what the job required and had a capable training function which understood how to train, they would get better results by selecting candidates on traditional lines and training appropriately.

Your options are

• outwit the psychometric testing process
• accept that you are better off not working for an employer who likes to buy snake oil from consultants

You may be right.

However, as I have pointed out before an employer can discriminate in any way it pleases except for the reasons prohibited by law.

So, if they feel that these tests are something they want to use or decide it is best to only employ people who own an umbrella that is their privilege.

Hammyman

Googlewhacker wrote: »

They are making it harder for people that companies don't want.....which is kind of the point of them.

They don't work. I passed the DWP one even though my views are for the most part a polar opposite of what they wanted.

If you have a reasonable level of intelligence,have kept up with what the PC brigade clamour for and also the latest trendy "management speak", you can pass them with ease. When its multiple choice, you can usually immediately disregard two out of the four answers and the remaining two require a little thought but again logic usually plays a part.

Whilst these tests are continuing to be marked against a template of "right" answers, it is quite feasible to circumvent them.

ChefBungle

Hammyman wrote: »

They don't work. I passed the DWP one even though my views are for the most part a polar opposite of what they wanted.

If you have a reasonable level of intelligence,have kept up with what the PC brigade clamour for and also the latest trendy "management speak", you can pass them with ease. When its multiple choice, you can usually immediately disregard two out of the four answers and the remaining two require a little thought but again logic usually plays a part.

Whilst these tests are continuing to be marked against a template of "right" answers, it is quite feasible to circumvent them.

Firstly, why would you want to work for a company or organisation where the accepted way of doing the job/culture of said company/organisation was the polar opposite of your own personally-held views? Surely this would make your working day a living hell as you'd be having to constantly concentrate on what you're doing and how you're behaving to ensure the "real you" doesn't slip out?

Secondly, it depends on the type of psychometric tests you refer to - I have gone through (and administered) a range of psychometric tests in my time. The ones that accurately measure verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning and preferred ways of working are extremely useful to both the employee and the employer. The employer is able to determine if you are intelligent enough to do the role - for example, if a role is heavily based on numeracy and being able to interpret/understand statistics, then scoring highly in a numeracy test would seem to me to be a perfectly acceptable prerequisite?

Some other tests such as Myers-Briggs and Belbin are useful at giving indications as to your preferred working style and the employer should take these into account as well - if your preferred working style is 'going it alone', then putting you into a role where teamwork is of paramount importance is unlikely to succeed - either from your perspective or the employer's perspective.

So I would say psychometric testing absolutely has its place in the recruitment and selection process, as long as the results are interpreted in the correct way and accurately referenced to the job description of the position you are applying for.

Vader123

The only people that oppose testing (psychometric etc) or pre-employment checks (oh - pick one.. say CRB or credit history) are the people that will fail them.

All the more reason to run the checks/tests IMO.

Vader

Emmzi

I'm fed up explaining why psychometrics work for SOME things and why they are helpful for SOME aspects pf recruitment to people who have no inclination to listen and are not qualified to use or interpret them.

They're legal, get over it. Attitude shines through at interview and if you are angry at the process it can be spotted a mile off.