Assessment tools not designed for recruitment shouldn't be used to select candidates
Many assessment tools have been misused over the years when it comes to recruitment. Some organizations keen to screen applicants and find that hidden gem aren’t using psychometric testing properly and have been tempted to use personality tests, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), in applicant selection.
But that’s not what those tests were designed for, according to Shawn Bakker, a chartered psychologist at Psychometrics Canada, an Edmonton-based firm that specializes in providing test measures for personnel selection.
“You’ll probably find a lot of people who are tempted to use MBTI for a selection type of process,” he said. “But it’s not recommended to use that for personnel selection simply due to the way it works.”
MBTI won’t help organizations evaluate candidates because it really only distinguishes between extroverts and introverts, he said.
“It doesn’t help you list how extroverted you are compared to other people,” he said. “So if you’re looking for a salesperson and you determine that it’s very important that you’re extroverted on the job, the MBTI would help you identify people with a preference for extroversion. But it wouldn’t say who are the most extroverted of that group.”
A personality test like Myers-Briggs works better for organizations looking to develop existing staff. It can work with groups to help them improve things like communication skills or help individuals identify strengths and weaknesses, he said.
But there are plenty of assessment tools on the market that have been designed specifically for candidate selection. Tests like the 16 Personality Factors, the Occupational Personality Questionnaire and the California Psychological Inventory can work well if used properly, he said.
Because of the proliferation of tests on the market, organizations should do the homework and research the test thoroughly before employing it, Bakker said. Firms should check with the publisher of the test to find out its reliability — the publishers have user manuals and test manuals and will be able to provide those statistics.
“The reliability of a test directly relates to how consistent a person’s results will be,” he said. “A reliable test will not experience a lot of shifting in results as a person takes the test time after time. Some have been really well done and some have been slapped together pretty quickly.”
The screening tests have limits and aren’t designed to measure mental health, he said.
“They’re not really going to tell you that the individual is actually dangerous to have at work because they might be mentally unstable,” said Bakker. “They are never going to relate to what your mental health might be like, just what jobs you might do well in and what jobs you might struggle with.”
A firm interested in evaluating an employee’s mental health would tend to look towards more traditional psychological tests that are administered by psychologists, he said. But that type of screening is usually reserved for the most senior positions.
But that’s not what those tests were designed for, according to Shawn Bakker, a chartered psychologist at Psychometrics Canada, an Edmonton-based firm that specializes in providing test measures for personnel selection.
“You’ll probably find a lot of people who are tempted to use MBTI for a selection type of process,” he said. “But it’s not recommended to use that for personnel selection simply due to the way it works.”
MBTI won’t help organizations evaluate candidates because it really only distinguishes between extroverts and introverts, he said.
“It doesn’t help you list how extroverted you are compared to other people,” he said. “So if you’re looking for a salesperson and you determine that it’s very important that you’re extroverted on the job, the MBTI would help you identify people with a preference for extroversion. But it wouldn’t say who are the most extroverted of that group.”
A personality test like Myers-Briggs works better for organizations looking to develop existing staff. It can work with groups to help them improve things like communication skills or help individuals identify strengths and weaknesses, he said.
But there are plenty of assessment tools on the market that have been designed specifically for candidate selection. Tests like the 16 Personality Factors, the Occupational Personality Questionnaire and the California Psychological Inventory can work well if used properly, he said.
Because of the proliferation of tests on the market, organizations should do the homework and research the test thoroughly before employing it, Bakker said. Firms should check with the publisher of the test to find out its reliability — the publishers have user manuals and test manuals and will be able to provide those statistics.
“The reliability of a test directly relates to how consistent a person’s results will be,” he said. “A reliable test will not experience a lot of shifting in results as a person takes the test time after time. Some have been really well done and some have been slapped together pretty quickly.”
The screening tests have limits and aren’t designed to measure mental health, he said.
“They’re not really going to tell you that the individual is actually dangerous to have at work because they might be mentally unstable,” said Bakker. “They are never going to relate to what your mental health might be like, just what jobs you might do well in and what jobs you might struggle with.”
A firm interested in evaluating an employee’s mental health would tend to look towards more traditional psychological tests that are administered by psychologists, he said. But that type of screening is usually reserved for the most senior positions.
