Advice for job seekers and recruiters concerned about cognitive tests

Since posting Why I'll never again work for a company that requires a pre-employment cognitive test, I started to get messages from both recruiters and job seekers concerned with the increased use of cognitive tests in recruitment processes.

It's easy to see the appeal that cognitive aptitude assessments, further enhanced by the emergence of AI-powered testing platforms: they do make the initial screening process more efficient.

Still, given the overwhelming evidence that diverse teams are smarter, it would be wise to look carefully at the validity of the claims made by HR tech companies extolling the virtues of their cognitive tests.

On one hand, it is true that, for a company with ill-designed talent acquisition processes, cognitive assessments may help to improve hiring decisions.

However, any organization seeking to acquire and retain high-functional, productive, and creative employees needs to aim higher.

In particular, when used as a screen out mechanism, the layer of convenience and objectivity that cognitive testing brings to the selection process comes with a significant risk of reducing the diversity of your candidate pool.

One of the people replying to my post was a recruitment consultant from Central Europe wondering about the validity of the claim by a HR tech solutions company that their automated cognitive tests "objectively prescreen candidates" and "improve diversity". To me the consultant's concerns seemed justified given the weak evidence provided to support the claim.

The first question I'd ask the test provider is, "What evidence do you have that the diversity achieved by your process doesn't stop with obvious categories like gender and race?" A truly diverse team has diversity of thought, viewpoints, human experiences. Making a cognitive test mandatory is a bad idea if it results in an homogeneous candidate pool in these dimensions—even if it consists of highly qualified applicants of various gender identities and ethnicities.

(Don't take my word for it; the testimonials included in my previous post and in comments left there represent only a tiny fraction of the stories shared by readers. I bet that if that you ask top performers on your own network, you'll likely find plenty of A players who voluntarily dropped out of a recruiting process upon learning about a cognitive test requirement, or were eliminated from the candidate pool due to their poor results.)

What to do if you're in talent acquisition

So, what to do if you're a recruiter working for a company that uses or is planning to adopt a cognitive aptitude test?

• Gather evidence of the undesired side-effects of this recruitment practice. Some of the people who wrote me said that they let the company know they were dropping out of their recruitment process because of a mandatory cognitive assessment step. Set up a process to collect these voluntary testimonials, and make a point to reach out to other candidates who came well-recommended or have an impressive list of accomplishments and then left the process before taking the test. In parallel, review the qualifications of those who were eliminated because of a low score. If you see signs that cognitive tests are limiting the range of strong candidates advancing in the process, write a report to share your conclusions.
• Consider recommending changes in the process so that candidates can opt out of the cognitive test without being automatically rejected. For some gifted minority candidates who on paper lack the experience or credentials, the ability to take a cognitive test may give them a welcomed chance to showcase their aptitude for the job. On the other hand, granting applicants the option to skip the assessment without being automatically disqualified will ensure that strong candidates who would bring welcome diversity to the team are given an opportunity to prove their value. The optimal solution may involve alternative assessment processes that account for different styles of thinking—which can also be supported by automation when necessary to accommodate a high volume of qualified applicants.

What to do if you're a candidate

Copywriter Anna Rickman recently left a comment in my post reinforcing the main concerns I hear from job seekers:

I found your post seeking more information and facts about the negative aspects of cognitive tests, which in the last year has fashionably exploded in Sweden (where I live). [...] I found cognitive test walls behind 9 out of 10 job ads. It bothers me on so many levels, not the least due to what our society risks by tightening the already narrow entrance into "acceptable" and what we believe to be "normal". Employers cannot expect creativity, innovation, and "out-of-the-box-thinking", while simultaneously squeezing creative minds into ready-made moulds.

Depending on your circumstances, it may be difficult to opt out of all recruiting processes requiring a pre-employment cognitive test.

When you decide to take the test, do your best to reduce test anxiety. It may be worth going back to re-read the comments left in Why I'll never again work for a company that requires a pre-employment cognitive test as a reminder that you’re not alone.

If you do the assessment and doesn't perform well, keep in mind that many accomplished job seekers experience a rejection due to poor test results at one point or another. It may be useful to ponder how much you really want to work for a company that handle skill assessment this way. (Remember, screening procedures go both ways!)

Finally, consider sharing your feedback with the employer, whether you take the test or not, and regardless of the final outcome. The last cognitive assessment I took for a job would have merited all test takers writing back to say, "You know, I shouldn't have to be able to do math in my head to work for you."

Additional reading:

How Cognitive Tests Hinder Efforts to Build Diverse and Creative?Teams by Anna Rickman