The Future of Pre-employment Screening

With nearly 4 million more jobs than unemployed Americans, companies have to be very intentional about how they screen job applicants. Having spent more than half of my career in management consulting (employment testing specifically), the pre-employment practices in the current tight labor market conditions are of great interest to me. I thought I would share a few thoughts about the current situation and offer a few ideas about future pre-employment screening practices.

Some employers have started scaling back on pre-employment screening as a result of the labor shortage. For example, some companies have revamped background checks to fight the labor shortage. Streamlining recruitment and hiring practices is always a good move, but simply doing less to have a faster process may not yield good results.? Pre-employment screening can help employers make informed decisions about who to hire, providing insight into an applicant's fit for the job and organization, their past, and potential risks. Pre-employment screening can include a broad array of elements including background checks, criminal history reports, drug tests, interviews, personality tests, work samples, simulations, intelligence tests, and assessment centers to name a few. While pre-employment screens vary in time and financial costs to the employer, they provide important information that aids employers in making sound and legally defensible hiring decisions. Regardless of how tight the labor market is, the costs associated with making poor hiring decisions are significant. So, regardless of how few applicants an employer has for any given position, eliminating pre-employment screens is not advisable unless it has been determined that certain screens or tests do not provide useful information.

On a related note, several states have either banned or are actively considering the elimination of pre-employment screening for cannabis use. This shift is primarily driven by the growing acceptance of marijuana, whether for medicinal or recreational purposes. Currently, twenty-one states, along with the District of Columbia, have granted legal status to marijuana for adult recreational consumption, and the majority of states have provisions for medical marijuana use. Many major companies are reconsidering drug testing or have abandoned drug-testing employees altogether. As more states embrace marijuana legalization, it's likely that this trend will persist in the coming years, leading to a gradual reduction in pre-employment cannabis testing. Nevertheless, it's important to note that marijuana remains prohibited under federal law, and specific federal regulations mandate drug and alcohol testing for individuals in safety-sensitive roles within industries such as aviation, railroads, and trucking. Consequently, federal agencies and entities contracted by the federal government will probably continue to employ such testing procedures to weed out potential problem employees. Also, employers will likely address workplace safety concerns around marijuana through reasonable suspicion and post-accident drug testing policies that target impairment instead of pre-employment drug screening.

It should be noted that companies should only use pre-employment screens that are relevant to the job in question and ensure that they are valid. There are a multitude of options on the market and many of the companies selling pre-employment screens and tests have tremendous marketing budgets which make their products look and sound amazing. Companies should determine the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) required to successfully perform the target jobs and choose screens that are valid measures of those KSAOs. Reputable testing companies will be able to provide employers with validity information for the tests and screens and most can help them determine if the content of their jobs aligns with the content their tests purport to measure. Skipping this step can expose companies to significant risk of litigation. Recent examples include Walmart, Target, among others.? A good test used for the wrong job or purpose is like taking good medicine for the wrong ailment. It can cause more harm than good.

Another consideration regarding pre-employment screens involves cost. Because some pre-employment screens are more expensive and/or time-consuming than others, employers should be strategic about when certain pre-employment screens are utilized in the hiring process. In general, less expensive and less time-consuming screens should be used earlier in the hiring process when the applicant numbers are larger. For example, minimum qualifications screens and multiple-choice tests measuring skills, abilities, personality, etc. are relatively cheap and easy to administer. Using these during the initial stages of the screening process can help to control expenses associated with administration time and cost of tests or assessments. After the applicant pool has been whittled down using these screens in earlier stages of the process, companies should use more expensive, more involved screens such as structured interviews, assessment centers, background checks, etc. Using this approach can help organizations avoid unnecessary costs and make the most of their time as well as that of the applicants.

How has the tight labor market affected your organization's pre-employment screening practices? How has it affected your behavior or decisions as a job applicant? Where do you see the future of pre-employment screening heading? I'd love to hear your thoughts and reactions.

This column also appeared in the Southern Miss Business newsletter. If you would like to receive the full newsletter, click this link https://eepurl.com/gjv7eU.

?

?

?

?

?

?