With regards to psychological testing in the workplace, I'd like to discuss two issues that I think need to be addressed if we are going to cover this topic thoroughly: 1) Should psychological testing be used for existing employees in an organization to "weed out" those that are not a good match for the organization? 2) Are the results of any one psychological test reliable enough on which to base a hiring decision?
I'd like to start focusing my research on these two aspects of this topic. There are historical considerations to workplace psychological testing that I believe play an important role in providing background, but that don't address modern organizations or the modern legal/ethical environment.
I have not done any digging into these issues yet, so if anyone has any suggestions, resources, or direction they'd like to contribute, feel free to chime in.
Any thoughts as to how this can be incorporated into the rest of the group's research would be more than welcome. I think this is a good topic and we can put together a very successful and well thought out paper.
Searching for the articles regarding “psychological tests”, I found some criticisms about making employees or job appliers conduct the psychological testing before promotions or in the interview. The biggest problem which is criticized most is that more and more people now only concentrate on how to perform well in the psychological tests, making the test lost its original functions. Now there are even some publications in the market teaching some skills when undergoing the tests.
I recognize that it is more convenient for the employers to classify people into fewer groups and eliminate those who are ineligible for the position, which originally is a brilliant and cost-effective way, while what causes more concerns is the reliability and credibility of those “psychological tests”. Since the psychological test industry is still unregulated, it is no doubt that some of these tests are not scientific in the least.
Therefore, it is quite important for employers to think precisely whether it is really a good choice to employ psychological tests on their employees or that’s say “prospective employees” considering the risks of being ineffectiveness, losing the morale, or even creating the anxiety throughout the working environment.
That's a great comment, Olivia. I'd like to see if there's some research on employees that "passed" a psychological test but ended up being a bad fit for the company or position.
Though psychological tests have proven effective for test of aptitude, IQ, Medical examination etc there are certain aspects such as validity and security that needs to be taken into consideration. In the past there weren’t enough restrictions and the tests were publicized on the basis of survey which was actually a violation of the privacy laws. But the new and improved laws have many psychological tests generally not available to the public. They have restriction both from the publishers of the test and from psychology licensing boards that prevent the disclosure of the tests themselves and information about the interpretation of the results. Test publishers consider both copyright and matters of professional ethics to be involved in protecting the secrecy of their tests and they sell tests only to people who have proved their educational and professional qualifications to the test maker's satisfaction. Purchasers are legally bound from giving test answers or the tests themselves out to the public unless permitted under the test maker's standard conditions for administration of the tests. Validity implies how accurate is it to say that a higher test score indicates that a person is more likely to be a better performer. There are many forms of validity evidence. For example, evidence might consist of showing a relationship between test scores and some outcome of interest (e.g., supervisory ratings of job performance, average monthly sales, turnover). Evidence might consist of documentation of links between the content of the test and the requirements of the job. Experienced and knowledgeable test publishers have information on the validity of their testing products. Trained professionals can help interpret whether the evidence supporting the particular inferences an employer wishes to make with a test is sufficient.
Thanks Tony, and I think what you’re saying is the concern of “validity” problem of the psychological tests, which is quite a pivotal issue since the test is not only helping employers to position their employees but also giving an initial clue to be perceived by all of the people in the company. Therefore, if the test leads to wrong perception, sometimes it might bring up more conflicts and mistrust in the workplace. For example, when I was researching for the company examples, I found that in order to reduce conflicts in the teamwork, some companies employ the test and try to educate everyone in the team regarding the diversity and different ways of dealing things. Once people notice that, they may have better ideas of the ways to work with different types of people. However, companies should be careful if the “validity” of the test is lost, then companies may have to deal tougher dilemma.
Thanks Tony, and I think what you’re saying is the concern of “validity” problem of the psychological tests, which is quite a pivotal issue since the test is not only helping employers to position their employees but also giving an initial clue to be perceived by all of the people in the company. Therefore, if the test leads to wrong perception, sometimes it might bring up more conflicts and mistrust in the workplace.
For example, when I was researching for the company examples, I found that in order to reduce conflicts in the teamwork, some companies employ the test and try to educate everyone in the team regarding the diversity and different ways of dealing things. Once people notice that, they may have better ideas of the ways to work with different types of people. However, companies should be careful if the “validity” of the test is lost, then companies may have to deal tougher dilemma.
Psychological testing in the workplace can be tricky. It is definitely a good supplement to the hiring process, but may be insufficient to rely on as the only hiring tool. Education, experience, and training may sometimes be more relevant in the decision making process of hire. The MBTI is a solid personality test that categorizes types of human characters which can be utilized in team building, diversity dynamics, conflict management, and decision making. Although helpful in the workplace, psychological tests can pose risk of liability, as some tests in the past have resulted in law suits, doctrines, and protection acts such as the Polygraph Protection Act (1988). The usage of tests is a good idea, but it is a decision that must not be taken lightly.
With regards to psychological testing in the workplace, I'd like to discuss two issues that I think need to be addressed if we are going to cover this topic thoroughly:
ReplyDelete1) Should psychological testing be used for existing employees in an organization to "weed out" those that are not a good match for the organization?
2) Are the results of any one psychological test reliable enough on which to base a hiring decision?
I'd like to start focusing my research on these two aspects of this topic. There are historical considerations to workplace psychological testing that I believe play an important role in providing background, but that don't address modern organizations or the modern legal/ethical environment.
I have not done any digging into these issues yet, so if anyone has any suggestions, resources, or direction they'd like to contribute, feel free to chime in.
Any thoughts as to how this can be incorporated into the rest of the group's research would be more than welcome. I think this is a good topic and we can put together a very successful and well thought out paper.
Searching for the articles regarding “psychological tests”, I found some criticisms about making employees or job appliers conduct the psychological testing before promotions or in the interview. The biggest problem which is criticized most is that more and more people now only concentrate on how to perform well in the psychological tests, making the test lost its original functions. Now there are even some publications in the market teaching some skills when undergoing the tests.
ReplyDeleteI recognize that it is more convenient for the employers to classify people into fewer groups and eliminate those who are ineligible for the position, which originally is a brilliant and cost-effective way, while what causes more concerns is the reliability and credibility of those “psychological tests”. Since the psychological test industry is still unregulated, it is no doubt that some of these tests are not scientific in the least.
Therefore, it is quite important for employers to think precisely whether it is really a good choice to employ psychological tests on their employees or that’s say “prospective employees” considering the risks of being ineffectiveness, losing the morale, or even creating the anxiety throughout the working environment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThat's a great comment, Olivia. I'd like to see if there's some research on employees that "passed" a psychological test but ended up being a bad fit for the company or position.
ReplyDeleteThough psychological tests have proven effective for test of aptitude, IQ, Medical examination etc there are certain aspects such as validity and security that needs to be taken into consideration. In the past there weren’t enough restrictions and the tests were publicized on the basis of survey which was actually a violation of the privacy laws. But the new and improved laws have many psychological tests generally not available to the public. They have restriction both from the publishers of the test and from psychology licensing boards that prevent the disclosure of the tests themselves and information about the interpretation of the results. Test publishers consider both copyright and matters of professional ethics to be involved in protecting the secrecy of their tests and they sell tests only to people who have proved their educational and professional qualifications to the test maker's satisfaction. Purchasers are legally bound from giving test answers or the tests themselves out to the public unless permitted under the test maker's standard conditions for administration of the tests.
ReplyDeleteValidity implies how accurate is it to say that a higher test score indicates that a person is more likely to be a better performer. There are many forms of validity evidence. For example, evidence might consist of showing a relationship between test scores and some outcome of interest (e.g., supervisory ratings of job performance, average monthly sales, turnover). Evidence might consist of documentation of links between the content of the test and the requirements of the job. Experienced and knowledgeable test publishers have information on the validity of their testing products. Trained professionals can help interpret whether the evidence supporting the particular inferences an employer wishes to make with a test is sufficient.
Thanks Tony, and I think what you’re saying is the concern of “validity” problem of the psychological tests, which is quite a pivotal issue since the test is not only helping employers to position their employees but also giving an initial clue to be perceived by all of the people in the company. Therefore, if the test leads to wrong perception, sometimes it might bring up more conflicts and mistrust in the workplace. For example, when I was researching for the company examples, I found that in order to reduce conflicts in the teamwork, some companies employ the test and try to educate everyone in the team regarding the diversity and different ways of dealing things. Once people notice that, they may have better ideas of the ways to work with different types of people. However, companies should be careful if the “validity” of the test is lost, then companies may have to deal tougher dilemma.
ReplyDeleteThanks Tony, and I think what you’re saying is the concern of “validity” problem of the psychological tests, which is quite a pivotal issue since the test is not only helping employers to position their employees but also giving an initial clue to be perceived by all of the people in the company. Therefore, if the test leads to wrong perception, sometimes it might bring up more conflicts and mistrust in the workplace.
ReplyDeleteFor example, when I was researching for the company examples, I found that in order to reduce conflicts in the teamwork, some companies employ the test and try to educate everyone in the team regarding the diversity and different ways of dealing things. Once people notice that, they may have better ideas of the ways to work with different types of people. However, companies should be careful if the “validity” of the test is lost, then companies may have to deal tougher dilemma.
Psychological testing in the workplace can be tricky. It is definitely a good supplement to the hiring process, but may be insufficient to rely on as the only hiring tool. Education, experience, and training may sometimes be more relevant in the decision making process of hire. The MBTI is a solid personality test that categorizes types of human characters which can be utilized in team building, diversity dynamics, conflict management, and decision making.
ReplyDeleteAlthough helpful in the workplace, psychological tests can pose risk of liability, as some tests in the past have resulted in law suits, doctrines, and protection acts such as the Polygraph Protection Act (1988). The usage of tests is a good idea, but it is a decision that must not be taken lightly.