Scrap These STUPID Psychometric Tests!

hcb42

I dont think you can technically "fail" a psychometric test either.

With Myers Briggs type, then they show a preference, not a right and a wrong.

Obviously mathematical and verbal reasoning do have a right and a wrong, but these are testing a particular skill. No point hiring an accountant who can't add..

KimYeovil

helencbradshaw wrote: »

No point hiring an accountant who can't add

or a copywriter who can't spell their own job title.

Welshwoofs

Truegho wrote: »

The government should scrap them and order these firms to return to more sensible methods of recruiting.

The Government can't 'order' firms to choose specific methods of recruiting. As long as a company isn't falling foul of discrimination legislation they can interview or test in any way they wish.

KiKi

Psychometric tests are as good as the people who use and administer them. They can be incredibly effective at weeding out at an early stage applicants who don't meet basic skills levels, especially where lots of people are applying for a few jobs.

There is OFTEN an assumption that psychometric testing is 'personality' testing. This isn't the case. There are some tests which look at how you approach situations ('personality' tests), but they should never be used as the reason to appoint or not - they should be one factor to look at in line with other results from interviews, application forms etc.

Many psychometric tests are verbal and numerical reasoning tests. A great one I've used many times is FastTrack, which assesses analysis skills.

You can't 'pass' or 'fail' psychometric tests. They show a set of results, or where you stand compared to the rest of the population taking the test. For example, if I saw a graduate applying for a graduate management role who had a FastTrack score of 34% or less, I would have to consider their analytical skills in line with their interview results and other assessments, and decide how important a factor it was, and whether they would struggle in the role they'd applied for.

However, if untrained people - or worse, people who are trained but still don't understand how to use them - administer them and make decisions based solely on those results, then I can understand why some people get frustrated by them.

In addition - and quite clearly demonstrated by some posts in this thread - many people don't understand what psychometric tests are, and assume they are merely personality tests which is completely untrue. Also, psychometric tests can contain a 'compliance' element: they show the test administrator how much the individual has tried to comply by putting results they think the company wants to hear!

There must be a whole raft of threads on this board about this, I'm sure I've seen several of these before!

KiKi

bristol_pilot

Hmmmm.....if I'm ever lying on an operating table with a neurosurgeon about to drill a hole in my skull I'd like to think that the surgeon had been appointed on the basis of good qualifications and a track record of achievement. Not whether someone was gregarious and likes parties or does lots of pre-planning before going on holiday. If I'm sending my kiddie to school, I'd like to think that the teacher has a good degree and achieved a high exam pass rate in previous years' classes rather than being assessed as either a 'thinker' or 'feeler'.

Can't help wonder whether some of these tests contain hidden gender or cultural (racial) bias, especially the older ones that date from a bygone era.

My company uses these tests for team development, but NEVER for selection. There is often a disclaimer in the accompanying test booklet saying they shouldn't be used for selection as they are not an indicator of ABILITY.

bristol_pilot

helencbradshaw wrote: »

I dont think you can technically "fail" a psychometric test either.

With Myers Briggs type, then they show a preference, not a right and a wrong.

Clearly there is a 'right and wrong' as far as the employer is concerned as some personality types will be appointed and others not. I think that's what the OP is complaining about really.

Emmzi

bristol_pilot wrote: »

Clearly there is a 'right and wrong' as far as the employer is concerned as some personality types will be appointed and others not. I think that's what the OP is complaining about really.

The OP will complain about anything s/he perceives as blocking her getting a job as long as it is not hir own fault, and has a long track record of doing so.

re: types, sometimes it is about what compliments the exisiting team, so there is not "a" right, but there can be one or two "wrongs" at any given point in time; but it never replaces qualifications, it complements the process.

axomoxia

They are a step above analysing handwriting as part of the recruitment process. Personally if you want to filter out 80% percent of job applicants, just divide the received cvs into five equal piles and shove four of the piles into the bin.

Edit to add:

Just looked at the Myers-Briggs personality types. Since pretty much all of them apply to me, I am either mad or its just snake-oil. My thoughts tend to the latter, although I'm sure some apologist for them will berate me for "not understanding how they work" and for a not inconsiderable fee, enlighten me....

KiKi

bristol_pilot wrote: »

Hmmmm.....if I'm ever lying on an operating table with a neurosurgeon about to drill a hole in my skull I'd like to think that the surgeon had been appointed on the basis of good qualifications and a track record of achievement. Not whether someone was gregarious and likes parties or does lots of pre-planning before going on holiday. If I'm sending my kiddie to school, I'd like to think that the teacher has a good degree and achieved a high exam pass rate in previous years' classes rather than being assessed as either a 'thinker' or 'feeler'.

Which is why you would never use a Myers-Briggs type test to recruit a neurosurgeon, or a teacher.

However, I would be comforted to know that neurosurgeons were being selected partly on their mathematical ability (for drugs use reasons), and that they hadn't sat a numerical reasoning test for which they only received 2%.

You are assuming that psychometric tests are being undertaken to recruit for a job, and are personality tests. That's rarely the case.

Can't help wonder whether some of these tests contain hidden gender or cultural (racial) bias, especially the older ones that date from a bygone era.

Some of the older tests do, but they are few and far between, now. And no reputable company should use them!

My company uses these tests for team development, but NEVER for selection. There is often a disclaimer in the accompanying test booklet saying they shouldn't be used for selection as they are not an indicator of ABILITY.

Again - you are talking about psychometric 'personality' tests. These are not the only types of tests. You're right, Belbin, MBTI etc shouldn't be used for recruitment.

Verbal, numerical, analysis etc tests ARE an indication of certain abilities - proven over and over again.

KiKi

DKLS

If you dont like the tests, dont apply for jobs that require them, I would happily do any psychometric test over an application form, if I saw a job that wanted an app form I simply wouldn't apply, doesnt mean I want to see them banned though.
For every job I have had and every candidate I have interviewed the process has been simple, CV and 1 and 3 interviews dependant on role.