Aptitude, Attitude or Platitude

by Mark Oliver

Psychometric testing is generally used in business to improve the accuracy of staff selections. It is also sometimes used to assess where currently employed staff can develop and therefore enhance their performance. This article focuses on the benefits in the primary use for organisational psychometric tests, which is in selection process, whether it is an external recruitment or internal promotion.

How effective are psychometric tests in assisting accurate selection?

There are two main types of psychometric test which can help in the areas of accurate selections for best performance: ability tests test maximal performance and personality tests test typical performance. There is a great deal of research on both types of psychometric test and the validity studies, (which indicates the probability of making the right or ‘best’ choice) show that the accuracy of the test can be high, depending on the test and the circumstances.

Ability tests may be aptitude tests and generally have a very high validity; the downside is that they basically measure only one or two competencies; ‘decision making’ and the ‘ability to learn’. Basically they are IQ tests and recent research and studies show that Emotional Intelligence, (EQ) is much more important when it comes to managerial performance.

While personality instruments generally have a lower validity than ability tests, they are still valid enough if the right ones are chosen. They cover a much wider range of competencies and better reflect the applicant’s level of EQ.

There are many other ways to evaluate applicants by behavioural selection, so why bother with psychometric tests?

The answer becomes clearer if we compare the two best alternatives for behavioural selection:

1. Assessment Centres provide combinations of tests, which usually include interviews, psychometric tests and team exercises.  When done well, this provides the most accurate of selection processes. There can be a number of disadvantages though, including high cost (not only with the facilities and equipment, but also in preparation/training time and facilitation/consulting costs), and managers’ and applicants’ time.

2. Traditional Behavioural Interviews have been shown to be little better than just picking names out of a hat, and are rarely used by organisations nowadays. Behavioural interviewing done well is highly valid, but it is more complex than might be first thought. It is not rare to find organisations who claim to be using behavioural event interviews, but who are in fact using non-behavioural ones.

For instance; if an organisation is asking questions such as, ‘tell us your three greatest strengths and/or three greatest weaknesses’, then at least part of the interview is non-behavioural. Numerous studies indicate these questions lead to assessments that have almost zero validity, because they favour the professional interviewee and their well thought out platitudes! Some actually have a negative correlation, because of the halo effect and other biases. In these cases it would be far better, to pick the names out of a hat, rather than use the selection processes!

Personality testing is an objective way to remedy some of the major disadvantages of these two processes in a cost effective manner. A good personality test provides relatively inexpensive, yet statistically valid information on an applicant’s predicted behaviours, and therefore likely performance, across a wide range of competencies. This is particularly important for the more ‘attitudinal’ competencies which are difficult to measure by other means, such as a competency like ‘tenacity’.

It is relatively easy for anyone to be ‘tenacious’ for the relatively short period of a selection process, but how tenacious will they be over time in the role? Suitable personality tests can provide valid information across a much wider range of competencies than interviews can usually manage, given the inevitable restrictions on interview times. Results from the better personality tests can also be used to assess motivational and cultural fit, which helps with retention and engagement.

Psychometric tests may not only provide a very cost effective addition to the selection process which increases its overall effectiveness, but they can also help with maintaining ‘engagement’ over the long term when the person is in the role. It is important to note that psychometric tests should not be used as the sole basis to choose applicants, and that an appropriate psychometric test is always chosen.

For example it is totally inappropriate to use the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) for any internal or external selection process because it is a typological instrument and evaluates preference and not behaviour. Instead organisations must use behaviourally based personality instruments, because behaviour is much more valid than preference as the basis of the assessment of performance at work. 

A very significant additional benefit is that ‘good personality test’ results can be used to improve the applicant’s performance immediately they start work without any additional cost.

Mark Oliver
Mark Oliver is an experienced facilitator and consultant who’s career spans in excess of 20 years, specialising in leadership, training, assessment and project management, Mark has worked on a variety of projects in diverse locations such as the United Kingdom, Falkland Islands, Germany, Cyprus, Belize, Mexico, Brunei, Hong Kong, South Korea and Nepal.

Mark can be contacted through The Training Link 1300 88 44 33