Pscychometric tests for jobs...

This is a rant on psychometric tests and how realistic to apply them for jobs.

Psychometric tests are steadfastly popular in the public and private sectors - the aim of these tests is to measure attributes like intelligence, aptitude and personality, providing potential employers with an insight into how well you work with other people, how well you handle stress, and whether you will be able to cope with the intellectual demands of the job.

That's all very well, but I wonder how realistic employers are in applying these tests on top of the requirements set for job applicants such as:

• 
  covering letter (where the candidate needs to sell themselves and should also have had the sense to check out and have knowledge of potential employer's company)

• 
  Resume (skewed to meet job description and job selection criteria)

• 
  and often with government positions, the selection criteria (which often lists half a dozen or more double or triple barrelled questions requiring around 300 words in response to each question).

You would then have Referees (past employers) who would qualify your qualifications/suitability for the job.

After listening to distressed calls from a mature aged friend who has a solid, professional nursing background, I can understand these type of hurdles if applied to someone with an education, fresh out of uni but with no work experience.

A person of average intelligence can sit down and score a high average on such psychometric tests.....however, the timing in performing these tests average out to around 23 seconds to responding to each question (eg 20 mins for 51 questions on numerics such as maths problem solving; 20 mins for 51 question on intelligence type; etc)....that's a different matter....because within 20 seconds you need to read, comprehend, analyse and produce a response to a question...Thinking on your feet - fast.

How realistic is that?confused I consider myself and the reader of this rant intelligent enough to successfully tackle such tests, but in all honesty how successful would we be with a 20 second time clock per question?

Naturally, the trick is to answer as many questions as possible, and not to waste more than 20 seconds on any question - move on without answer if possible.

The saving grace for my friend was to point out a younger friend of ours who was in a similar position (bright spark too) when applying for a job who also bombed out (ran out of time).

Does this rant make any sense to anyone or am I the one being unrealistic (and probably feeling very sympathetic to my distraught friend)?

Would love to hear some comments on this.

 

Here in the West employers are so desperate for workers they would take a robber's dog. My firm needs 2 people and forget psychometric or any other of these BS tests, a pulse is all thats needed. In any case there is no test devised that will tell whether a person will do the job well or poorly as really everyone cons there way thru such things and when on the job reverts to their usual practice.

 

Thank you! You have succinctly expressed my thoughts exactly! :clap

I have seen this occur with successful job candidates on occasion and wondered what the hell Human Resources were doing when such types were hired for the job.confused rolleyes

 

These tests in my experience are a waste of time. How someone performs in them does not reflect their abilities to do that job. There are so many different scenarios to life and how one will react;how one is feeling each day;level of confidence etc...that in a nutshell it is no real indication of how the employee will perform. I have had quite a few of these 'tests' and find that you fall into 'mindgames' with the employer - will i write the answer they want to hear?I want the job, so I had better not write the honest truth about my behavioural tendencies etc.
When I was latterly the employer, I always went with common sense and gave the employee a test in actual duties that they would have to do as part of their job; ie PC understanding, customer service ability,mental arithmetic etc.

 

Thank you Grumbles. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

I find these psychometric tests that are applied on top of the other requirements for job applicants just a lazy way for recruiters to cull back applicants. These tests are often applied when there is anything over 300 applicants for the same job - and this is often the case with many government jobs where they can receive 500+ applicants for the one job.

In my friend's case, she is trying to merge her nursing background with her legal degree - the two jobs she applied for she bombed out miserably only due to the time factor. That really says a lot, because it boils down to not how well but how fast you think on your feet which I found/thought was even more unrealistic for the positions she applied for. If you're a member of a SWAT team, then YES, you would need to think fast on your feet because lives depend on it!

 

I think all test should not be timed, or at least give you >=4hrs to complete, I get so nervous under pressure. especially on Iq tests.

 

Psychometric tests were hijacked by personnel departments in an effort to justify thier own existence. I find it sad and somewhat alarming that so many people fall for it.

 

All great responses. Thank you! Thoughtful, justifiable, logical and sensible (in my humble opinion).

Jimmy Tarbrush You are soooo right in your comments of HR hijacking these tests. Sick part is that in some instances, many HR depts plagarise those tests. So the tests are not really designed specifically for the job in question anyway! confused

Halo Your views and comments hit the nail on the head on every point you've made. One glowing point is at your work they seek to minimise stress and imho the approach towards short listed job candidates is a good one...it also sounds like selection was based on CV/Resume and Referees' references without the added testing. The panel interview is commonly used in public and private sectors also....makes good sense. Loved your last comment: "Kinda would hazard a guess if the HR dept who think of using these tests took it themselfs they would fail miserably." Yup!

MellowMan Agree with you re timing...like Halo mentioned, depends on reason/type of test done. Know what you mean about stress at tests...at uni during exam times, I would leave my brains outside the door before walking into the exam room then picked my brains up on the way out at exam end

 

The key to these tests is to be able to know when they are asking the same question, only in different ways, using different sentence structure and words. I can, and have "passed" (in a manner of speaking), every one of those tests because:
1. I know how they're made
2. I know what they're looking for
3. I can answer them the way the interviewer expects them to be answered
4. I can identify the same questions in disguise.

Ive finished 100 question personality assessment tests in 20-25 minutes.

What they try to do it to get your reactive answer because that's the one that typically "gives you away" so to speak..

They're retarded tests and any one can make themselves appear as the most desirable candidate if they so choose.

 

Yep, I would have to agree with the above posts. Psychometric tests only measure one thing - the applicant's ability to do a Psychometric Test rolleyes . By that, I mean the ability to perform a said test on paper usually has little relevance to the ability to perform a vocation, or the ability of a person to work as a team with others - as Halo said usually far more important than scoring some entirely synthetic, artificial number on a test.

Experience has shown me, both as an employee and employer that people can ace a psychometric test and have appalling social skills, usually a sure recipe for disaster. Ergo, one can flunk the theoretical tests, but be an invaluable employee. Like was said, it's primarily just a lazy way of whittling down a large volume of applicants in an even larger bureaucracy. Unfortunately, a lot of Govt. Depts. and big businesses are based on bureaucracy.

As L.S. would know only too well, legal and nursing areas require practical experience, thoroughness, attention to detail and teamwork more than anything. I did a stint of Nursing many years back, and I'd be telling your friend not to stress out about a job that thinks you have to pass some kind of Psychiatric marathon in order to be considered, i.m.h.o.

 

Yes Kodo, points well made. The personality assessment tests (assess motivation, interests and values, as well as your behaviour and attitudes) was one of the tests, which she successfully managed according to her report because like you said they ask the same question different ways (for legal positions your integrity is constantly in question). As Grumbles stated, "will i write the answer they want to hear?" and that's why this set is used to try "tripping" you up.

The aptitude tests (assessing numerical 20mins; verbal 20mins and logical reasoning 20mins, each with around 50-60 questions) was the stumbling block for timing.

Like Halo said, the tests can be counter-productive and some worthy candidates who can do the job but perform badly at such tests sadly miss out.

Having worked with her in a legal environment, as a colleague I know her level and quality of performance as do her referees. Frankly, I could not justify the aptitude tests for a mature, experienced worker such as herself along with her excellent academic results. She's a good thinker within the required times on the job, so I found these psychometric tests on top of her covering letter, Resume, selection criteria and employers' references unrealistic - in my honest opinion.

 

Abstracts from

Thank you Phantom and the thoughtfulneSs of all who have taken the time in responding to my rant. I am going to show my friend these responses so she can see that it wasn't only my biased opinion as her friend.

Thank you all again.:wave You are a very supportive group in more ways than one.

Cheers

LS

 

Just had to do another post on this after speaking with my friend because I roared laughing when she told me of a conversation she had upon calling one of the govt depts and challenging them on one of the numerical questions which she couldn't get right....

She explained to them the process she went through with one particular question and no matter how she approached it, she couldn't get the right answer. confused

Response: the speaker has to consult one of the experts rolleyes and will call her back to explain the process because he can't work it out or get the right answer either roflmao

So much for 20 second responses to such questions:neener ....what was it that Halo and company said.....hmmm...boy were you guys right

 

Phsyco testing is just a refuge for bad management ok you need to know a little about the mental ability of the applicant but mostly a good manager can ask the right questions to judge an applicants ability to work in the envirenment of the position the are recruiting for.

the phsyco test is another way of under achievers to justify their position.:crap

 

Yes BM, good managers can sus out the right candidates...trouble with a large volume of applicants, some public and private sectors use Human Resources to cull back candidates before handing over short listed candidates to a manager, As Phantom said, when there's bureaucracy, these psychometric tests are implimented.

As for the under achievers, their true colours show quickly once on the job (which many who have responded to this rant have pointed out).

But I'm still laughing at the latest outcome (see my previous post) where "bureaucracy" couldn't do the test

 

Yes BM, good managers can sus out the right candidates...trouble with a large volume of applicants, some public and private sectors use Human Resources to cull back candidates before handing over short listed candidates to a manager. As Phantom said, when there's bureaucracy, these psychometric tests are often implimented.

As for the under achievers, their true colours show quickly once on the job (which many who have responded to this rant have pointed out).

But I'm still laughing at the latest outcome (see my previous post) where "bureaucracy" couldn't do the test

 

As for the under achievers, their true colours show quickly once on the job

I fully agree with you the only comment i will make is that i once upon a time worked in a large company and the transport manager would not have got a position sweeping the yard if a proper manager had done the interview when he applied for the job, His CV was spectacular he had a degree in management and all the relevant qualifications the only problem was he had absolutely no idea about man management he tried to rule by fear and used his under manager as a fall guy for all that went wrong it took almost three years until he eventually cut his own throat and an awful lot of other problems came to light he lost the firm a number of good employees who just could not work with him and that all came about because he looked so good on paper.

 

Yes BM, sad truths about some people. Just because you might have the degree and look good on paper doesn't mean you're going to cut it...imho there are many people out there with practical experience and no degree who can do the job better.

Having qualifications by getting "that piece of paper" doesn't mean you can sit on your laurels. As far as I'm concerned, the writing on that degree/diploma becomes invisible within a couple of years in which time you have to prove your own worth - with integrity, truth and honour.

Cheers

LS

 

Re: Update re: Pscychometric tests for jobs...

ABSTRACT FROM -

A huge Thank you for the thoughtful and supportive responses to my above post. Your feedback helped me to build back my friend's self-esteem.

Update: Next step, I gave her a job lead she followed up (here she was strictly on her own merits). She started yesterday with a job ideally suited to her with a great, mentoring, supervising lawyer. Goes to show how effective support and networking is when it comes to job searching.

Thanks again!:wave

Cheers

LS

 

Re: Update re: Pscychometric tests for jobs...

I'm glad your friend got a sterling job that she loves. Sounds like she's the caliber of person that deserves it. I wish her all the best for now, and the future.

P.S.:- She's very lucky to have a good friend like YOU, i.m.o.

 

Re: Update re: Pscychometric tests for jobs...

Thanks for your good wishes Phantom. You're very kind.

MG's feedback provided sufficient evidence on an international basis to prove my comments weren't just bias.

(Now I need to find a "switch off" button for her excited job reporting phone calls to me!)

Cheers

LS