Pre-hire tests expose "deviants" and identify talent

17 July 2009 8:40am

A prominent academic has slammed critics of pre-hire personality tests, saying that the tests are better than veteran managers at selecting high performers and eliminating "deviant behaviours" from the workplace.

Professor Deniz Ones, an industrial psychologist at the University of Minnesota, told HR Daily that scientific or standardised personality tests unearth "better candidates than even the best interviewers could identify".

"I know this sounds hard to believe," she says. "It is very difficult to overcome the belief that getting to know the candidate personally is still the best way to evaluate their suitability.

"[But] nearly 100 years of research has gone into these standardised tools."

Ones says that her recent work on personality tests was prompted by persistent criticism that the tools weren't practical or that respondents could easily fake results.

"Contrary to many of these critics, we actually used large-scale evidence collected in thousands of studies across many hundred thousand individuals, and summarised it to show that personality tests relate strongly to performance on the job," she says.

"Even if some critics try to refute this with humorous anecdotes or simple unsupported speculations, the evidence is very clear. Organisations can use personality tests to identify high performers even before they are hired."

Deviancy determined by temperament

Ones says scientific personality tests are invaluable for identifying and eliminating candidates prone to deviant behaviour.

Acts of deviance, she says, range from "mild forms" - such as minor time theft or misuse of relatively inexpensive company resources - to unexplained absences, destruction of property, theft, harassment, incivility and violence that can have "serious economic consequences" for an organisation.

She says that while a wide range of circumstances can elicit deviant behaviours (such as financial stress), an employee's decision "to be deviant" is determined, to a large extent, by his or her temperament or personality.

"Traits such as integrity, honesty, and conscientiousness play a key role in determining whether employees steal, embezzle, or otherwise harm the organisation or their co-workers," she says.

Employees who are highly conscientious engage in fewer deviant acts against their employers, and employees who are agreeable engage in fewer deviant acts against other individuals.

"Personality tests... not only predict who will avoid deviance," Ones says, "but also who will actively perform the core tasks of their job reliably and diligently."

Spot high performers for less than $40

"Off-the-shelf" personality tests can cost less than 40 Australian dollars per test-respondent, Ones says, which is far cheaper than other recruiting methods such as pre-employment interviews (in terms of person hours invested).

"The practice of online administration and feedback which is now offered for most modern personality tests requires virtually no organisational resources and time," she says.

However, she warns that personality tests won't be effective if the wrong type of test is used.

Employers, she says, should:

ensure the test-publisher has a good reputation and adheres to standards established by the international scientific community; and

have the results interpreted by experts.

Ones concedes that there is a chance a test will turn off talent, but says that the positives far outweigh the risks.

"It is true that people prefer to undergo a pre-employment interview or fill out an application [form], compared to taking any standardised test," she says. "However, it is also true that the methods most liked by applicants are less useful to organisations."

In any event, research has shown that candidates who react negatively to selection or screening tests are those who perform poorly in them, Ones says.

"Good candidates typically react more positively."

Further, a history of or propensity for deviancy is unlikely to be revealed during the more traditional hiring process, she says.

Intervene early when deviancy emerges

When deviancy emerges among existing staff, employers must intervene early, Ones says, and the reaction should always be "appropriate", relative to the act.

In some cases, she says, the employee might simply need to be reminded of company policies. In more serious cases, such as uncivil or aggressive behaviour, disciplinary action should be explored. And in the event of illegal activity, she says, employers should contact the appropriate authorities.

Employers, she says, could also consider monitoring employees to "discourage and prevent deviant behaviours".

However, Ones says that monitoring methods - such as surveillance cameras and internet monitoring - are typically ineffective in curtailing counter-productive behaviour.

If you have some HR news to share or would like to suggest a topic for an article, click here to email the editor.

1 comment | Comments closed

How to investigate a workplace incident
Don't wait for fraud before tackling gambling issues
How to deal with difficult employee behaviour - without disturbing the peace
Get better results from your recruitment partners
Supervision critical in preventing employee fraud
Is a "corporate psychopath" lurking among your ranks?

Latest headlines

Advanced search

search for	from date

	to date