Tests, tests and more tests....

The relevance of the very many different personality tests in Recruitments.

Monday, 13 January 2020

Many of us in our early days, loved solving puzzles, the reasoning and quantitative types. ‘Competition Success Review’, ‘Bournvita Quiz Contest’ used to be our staple diet. It proved to be very useful in preparing for the varied competitive exams, which comprised of mostly quantitative reasoning, abstract reasoning, which at that time, was regarded as an estimate of intelligence. This became widely used as measures of predicting success, and hence employed for quantifying individuals’ aptitude, and entry into prized professions, courses and institutions.

Then the advent of personality tests brought about a new dimension in identifying traits that predict behaviour and thus success in different types of roles. This was different from the earlier tests that measured ‘skills’ for the job, which determined that capability for different roles. Since these personality tests evaluated the elusive attitudinal aspects, it became a diagnostic part of qualifying individuals for jobs.

Today, there is a plethora of Personality tests available, viz., Myer-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), Disc Assessment, Winslow Personality Profile, Process Communication Model, Holtzman Inkblot Technique, etc. For each need, there is a personality test.

And there are many tests which profess to significantly improve the success levels of hires and thus are very attractive to Recruiters who want to reduce ‘bad hires,’ the cost of which is typically estimated to be at least one year’s salary. Hence there is a significant increase of usage of personality tests in hiring process.

Some of these tests have acquired a cult status, with individuals proudly publishing their scores on their job resumes. And there are organizations that overemphasize personality tests in hiring, sometimes using wrong assessment tools the wrong way.

Recruiters often forget their basic role, that is, to identify an individual who would not only succeed and grow in the particular Company’s eco-system but would also be instrumental in leading the Company to transform itself to be relevant and sustainable in the future. Hence overdependence or using personality tests as a ‘gate’ may keep out many radical transformational leaders, and bring in all of similar personality type which may be suicidal in the evolving business environment.

While using Personality tests, Recruiters have to ensure that they are reliable and valid, legally compliant, administer it properly, ensure validation, and share the results with the candidate. Then, using the psychometric results as input data for further discussion, relate it to their observations of the candidate in different situations and more from development than selection perspective.

Personality tests can never replicate the role of Personal Interviews led by mature senior professionals. The old fashioned exploratory, in-depth, discussions with the reporting manager and the seasoned HR professional brings out something which the tests never can, the ‘chemistry’ between the candidate and manager, as well as a cultural fit with the ethos of the Company.

One of the most prolific and appropriate application of this is in the Defence Services, the search for ‘Officer like Qualities.’ Initiated by US Army in 1917 to differentiate Officers from other ranks through a fast, mass scale, standardized personality tests, it was replicated in 1941 in the British Services and in India in 1943. The Selection Process starts with an aptitude test, which has minimum qualifying standards for the next round, i.e. the Personality Assessment by the Services Selection Board, culminating in the Medical Examination and selection as an Officer of the elite forces.

The Personality Assessment focuses on elements like empathy, ownership, initiative, decision making under stress, ability to lead, communicate and motivate, leading from the front, self confidence, determination and resilience. The battery of tests used to evaluate suitability is varied and tests ‘multiple intelligences’, followed up by in-depth personal interview and on-the-field observation; thus creating high test-retest validity. Even today, they remain as the most holistic and valid mechanisms of selection.

Recruiters have to recognize the behaviours that for their Company and the role works for them, and thereafter identify specific personality tests, that are reliable and valid, legally and ethically compliant; and use the results of these tests as support data, to better understand the candidate, his/her motivation, resilience, chemistry with the team, manager.

This will not only predict success better, but also engage the candidate better with his/her Manager and finally bring back the ‘Personal’ part back to the ‘Personal Interview.’