4 ms·
So, what training do you suppose anyone has in interpreting these tests? No one in the hiring loop is a trained psychologist, why would I want you to try to int
by RogerL 4y ago
So, what training do you suppose anyone has in interpreting these tests? No one in the hiring loop is a trained psychologist, why would I want you to try to interpret the results of the MMPI or whatever? First of all, and I know the law says differently, but this is medical information. I'm not sharing the MRIs of my back (which you also can't interpret), and I'm not sharing mental health information either.
But, suppose you did have a degree and specialized training in these tests. Do you think such a person can reasonably predict job performance and fit? It's reading tea leaves. The two biggest predictors of on the job performance is first, previous on the job performance and then general intelligence. After that it is all noise. You can go to an office and talk to a shrink for weeks and they still won't really grasp how you think or be able to make predictions about your future. If you dispute that, show me the research.
It's phrenology and biases all wrapped under the blanket of "objectivity".
Example of bias: Test X output Y shows correlation with OTJ performance (really, peer reviewed and all that). Cool! Correlation, not equivalence. Which means at least some portion of the population will do poorly on the test, but great at the job, and vice versa. What are the chances that neurodiverse people are in that category, or women, or blacks in a white culture, or.... And, regardless of that, suppose you are one of the people, in no particular protected or disadvantaged group, that does poorly. Should you never get hired, or get offered lower pay/responsibilities, because you do bad on this standardized test that gets run by so many companies? Is this what we want from society? Even pretending that the person seeing the results of the test in fact has the training and ability to interpret the results. There are cultures where they tend to show up as lying on these tests, but it is a cultural artifact. We know this. And a real medical professional consider the tests as indicative or suggestive - a point from which to start. Are you actually paranoid, or did you have a bad test day, or does your culture value something that pings poorly on the test? You don't know without a lot more investigation. HR is merely going to say "pass". Well, they'll ghost you, but anyway.
I'm sure someone can come up with some good examples of tests (well, maybe not sure, but I'll credit it is possible), but these tests all seem to be someone's hobby horse, promoted because it makes things seem objective and fair (so we don't get sued!), or because it is woo.
I've overstated my case a bit, but cmon. No one interviewing is a doctor, they shouldn't be using tests designed for medical relevance, and we should strive for inclusiveness. Can you code and not insult your interviewer while being questioned? Sounds like a hire to me. Oh, the MMPI says you are on the introverted side, or have issues with depression? Go fuck off, interviewee? I don't want to live in that world.
- markshuttle 4y agoOur talent assessment team include several people with Masters and PhD level qualifications in psychometric and behavioural assessment, so that we can provide a rigorous and professional perspective in this regard. Every candidate who gets past early stage interviews meets a dedicated HR professional.
- justinjlynn 4y agoThanks for replying directly, Mark. Do candidates receive transparent feedback and information regarding exactly how the standardised testing/behavioural assessment has been interpreted, how it has effected their candidacy, and relevant information regarding the background of those interpreting the tests? Is there any means to contest this interpretation and/or request a secondary opinion by a qualified professional chosen by an independent third party?