Psychometric assessment

The use of psychometric assessment in the recruitment process often draws a mixed response from both companies and candidates alike. A lot of this has to do with the scarcity of user-friendly information and the very technical nature of the psychometric industry. This industry is heavily influenced by experts who inadvertently reinforce the mystery surrounding psychometric research and interpretation. Psychometric assessment is often over-rated, over-used and over-priced. It's not unusual to hear of candidates exposed to four hours or more of such testing. In most cases these practices are unnecessary and overstate the role of psychometric assessment in the selection decision. Candidate psychometric assessment is simply an aid to this decision making process. After all, no psychometric tool can claim to be 100 percent accurate in predicting a candidate's work performance for a given role. That said it's easy to fall victim to the claims made by this industry, so here are some tips for getting the most from candidate assessment.

Firstly, make sure you're using the most recent, well researched tools that are benchmarked and relevant to the job description and level. We are amazed at the number of companies still using instruments like MBTI and DiSC for recruitment purposes. These tools were never designed with recruitment in mind and are an unreliable aid to recruitment. Related to this issue is the need to match the assessment tools with the characteristics you're seeking to measure, these broadly fall into personality (ie. the 'five factor' model - openness to change, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and emotional stability) and various abilities measures (eg. numerical, verbal, mechanical, spatial, abstract reasoning, problem solving, etc). Your consultant should understand the differences between these tools and be able to recommend a minimum number that cover the key aspects of the role.

Secondly, consideration needs to be given to the number of instruments used. This involves balancing the needs of the organisation for accurate candidate data with the impact of assessment fatigue. More testing is not always better; in fact it can be counterproductive, give irrelevant and at times contradictory data and be unnecessarily expensive. As a rule of thumb, three or four instruments administered over a 90 minute session is more than adequate. Any additional testing may be appropriate for specific technical roles where additional or broader abilities may be required.

The delivery of the assessment service itself warrants careful consideration. Access to a psychologist with master's level qualifications provides a considerable advantage over someone trained at an undergraduate level. Clinical Psychologists, for example, are trained to identify and treat personality issues that fall outside the 'normal' profile. Few organisations would choose to hire a manger with strong narcissistic tendencies yet most undergraduate psychologists are not experienced in assessing this area. Hence, it pays to understand the level of training and experience you are getting as part of the assessment service.

The service delivery also includes the administration of the assessment. One of the drawbacks of on-line assessment is that the administrator is not getting a full-picture of the candidate's true personality and abilities. Face-to-face administration by a Clinical Psychologist can add a great deal more value in terms of additional data to assist the selection decision. Remote on-line assessment is also prone to misrepresentation, after all you never really know who's completing the assessment and may only identify the 'real' behaviours once the candidate accepts the role. This can then become an expensive exercise to redress if the decision is made on false or misleading information.

Finally, face-to-face test administration, report generation and personalised client (and candidate) feedback need not be an expensive exercise. A tailored selection of appropriate instruments, administered over a 90 minute period with next day feedback need not cost a fortune. The value is in providing an objective third-party perspective that can help clarify, confirm or challenge existing impressions and encourage a more rigorous selection process.

Anthea Hickey – Director

Over the past fifteen years Anthea has gained first hand experience in dealing with the human impact of change. As a Clinical Psychologist she has been involved in assessing, treating and researching a wide range of issues that impact an individual's quality of life. A leading expert in depression, Anthea is well published and has made a significant contribution to our understanding of this condition.

Prior to joining Talent Solutions Anthea owned and operated a successful clinical practice with wide exposure to a number of large Australian companies through various Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs). Anthea has also worked in both the private and public sectors in Australia and overseas.

In recent times Anthea has applied her strong clinical expertise in an organisational setting. She has been integral to establishing a growing candidate assessment practice at Talent Solutions as well as a proven capacity to provide profiling services to companies seeking better ways to measure high performance. As an experienced executive coach, Anthea provides practical strategies for dealing with change, conflict and interpersonal effectiveness.

In addition to extensive industry experience, Anthea holds a Bachelor of Psychology, a Masters of Science in Medicine and a Masters of Clinical Psychology. She is a member of the Australian Psychological Society and a Registered Psychologist.