Personality Assessments, Skills Tests and the Twelve Angry Men : Prima Voca

Posted by pvadmin on October 7, 2018 9:18 pm / 0 Comments

In Twelve Angry Men a jury of everyday people are presented with what initially appears to be an open and shut case. Fairly straightforward “facts” are used to decide the fate of the accused. Upon entering the juror room, there’s a pretty high consensus of what the verdict will be, but one persistent and annoying juror is not satisfied.

The hero of the movie provides a lesson for anyone who is trying to find the best talent to fit a particular role in their organization. If YOU are that skilled workplace hero, THANK YOU for what you do! Don’t ever quit, because there are eleven other people who are content to make uniformed decisions because they don’t want to dig in.

What are assessments?

Assessments (evaluations, profiles, tests, exams, surveys) are one of the tools used to take a look at potential employment candidates. A hammer is a tool. It can be used to drive a nail in a wall or to bash someone in the skull. Whether it’s used for good or evil is dependent upon the individual entrusted with the tool.

With that in mind, here are common statements about assessments and recommendations:

The (fill in the blank) assessment is a tool that is used to select the right candidate for the job.

FALSE!!! An assessment is ONE of the tools used to HELP evaluate during the selection process. Without an understanding of what the tool really can or cannot say, organizational and job objectives and some common sense, it is a useless tool.

Assessments are Reliable

FALSE!! Reliability is relative. In general the reliability of an assessment is in the degree of consistency with which it measures what it is supposed to measure. For example, if an assessment can tell you that something is predictable 81% of the time that means it may not predict at least 19% of the time. The reason I say “at least” is because the predictability is based on the number of times it gets the answer right along with formulas to further predict based on variables. We can randomly get the correct answer on true/false questions a certain number of times, just by guessing. This also alludes to when it is profitable to use an assessment. If the test is likely to get it wrong 1 out of 5 times and you are correct on your own 50% of the time, it might not be cost effective to use an assessment. This depends on organizational goals, cost of getting it wrong, etc.

Consider at a minimum the following factors: — level of adverse impact associated with your assessment tool — selection ratio (number of applicants versus the number of openings) — cost of a hiring error — cost of the selection tool — probability of hiring qualified applicant based on chance alone.

Tests can be used to identify potentially good workers.

True. The key word is “potentially.” So it’s possible, but not full proof.

It is critical to have a clear understanding of what needs to be measured and for what purpose.

Strongly consider training and certification for those expected to evaluate assessment results.

Assessments can have errors.

True. There can be measurement errors, errors predicting success of performance on the job, all kinds of things. That’s why the recommended best practice is to use more than one approach. Also, your own data on success/failure of your choices in the past can be very telling. It can tell you what is working for your organization and what is not. Use a “whole-person” approach to candidate evaluation.

Inappropriate use of assessments can land your company a hefty lawsuit.

True. It’s better to be a juror than the accused, even if you’re innocent. A quick example: If an assessment adversely impacts someone above of the age of 40 in the US one can be found in violation of ADEA. And if the assessment asks, it then needs to demonstrate that asking doesn’t influence the results.

I don’t have to save my assessment results when I’m done with them

False. In the US, The Uniform Guidelines require that all employers maintain a record of the employment-related activities, including statistics related to testing and adverse impact. If one has more than 100 employees, this EEOC Title VII regulation on record-keeping applies to them.

Weigh cost/benefit of use of psychological profiles

Some personality inventories have been developed to determine psychological attributes. These clinical tools may not be specifically designed to measure job-related personality dimensions. Recommended use is in very limited employment situations, primarily with jobs where it is critical to have some idea about an applicant’s state of mind, such as in the selection of law enforcement officers or nuclear power plant workers. Understanding of impact to the candidate should be considered as well.

A handful of others to keep in mind:

Use job relevant tests for characteristics that are important to the job.
Use only reliable assessment instruments and procedures. This means coming back after the fact to learn what truly worked.
Use assessments that are appropriate for the target population. Don’t use it here just because you used it there.
Use tests that measure consistently. (Example, if the person takes the test again, they would get a similar score.
Differences in training, experience, and frame of reference among raters can produce different test scores for the test taker.

It’s realistic say if one truly spent all their time examining EVERY area of their process, it would be almost impossible to run a business. However a basic understanding of how a process might/might not cause a problem will help to keep the risk down.

In the end, as in Twelve Angry men, it’s all about the skill of the evaluator(s). Regardless of the extent to which the process is structured or unstructured, the skill of the evaluator can make a difference in the quality of the information gathered.

The quality, level of training and skill of the person(s) using the tool is of utmost importance.

For more information, check out: