[IPAC-List] Test taking advice for personality tests

[Blair, Michael [HR]]

Pat -
There is a plethora of good validation evidence for personality tests based on the Five-Factor model.  Conscientiousness often reports validity coefficients second only to general intelligence (and work sample tests).  Most of the major players in the assessment arena (e.g., SHL-PreVisor, Kenexa, DDI, Aon) offer tests based on the Big Five.  Specific tests that I am aware of that have been validated for pre-employment purposes in public sector, private sector, and public safety include the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), the 16-PF (based a model pre-dating the Big Five), the California Personality Inventory (CPI), as well as several that are variations on the Myers-Briggs (can’t think of the assessment titles).
The key, in my opinion, is a local validation effort.  This is where the writer from the blog that Joel referenced at the start of this listserv topic is all washed-up.  He makes an assumption that all personality-based tests are scored the same way.  In reality, applicability, use, and scoring should vary by the job, which is where the local validation study comes in.  The writer lays out a “cheat-sheet” emphasizing extroversion, as one example, with high scores being the desired characteristic.  In fact, the validation study will determine if extroversion is related to successful job performance or not.  It is entirely possible (and I have seen it in practice) that extroversion-related attributes will translate into a high score for one job and a low score for another.  For example, if I’m hiring for a position that will be representing the company at conferences, in the media, etc., extroversion is desirable. If I’m hiring for an IT backroom coder, the last thing I want is an extrovert.  I might use the same test for each position, assuming it validated for each, but the scoring model and the “pass/fail” criteria would be quite different.
_________________________________
Michael Blair
Manager Recruitment
Network Operations, Wholesale & Recruitment Technology
Office: 913-439-5222/ Wireless: 913-832-6130
michael.blair at sprint.com<mailto:michael.blair at sprint.com>
www.linkedin.com/in/blairmichaeld<http://www.linkedin.com/in/blairmichaeld>

From: Patrick McCoy [mailto:Patrick.McCoy at psc-cfp.gc.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 12:42 PM
To: rene.shekerjian at cs.state.ny.us; ipac-list at ipacweb.org; Mark Hammer; Blair, Michael [HR]
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Test taking advice for personality tests

Michael-

Would appreciate if you could list a few good ones for which solid validity evidence is available when they are used to assess applicants to professional jobs (applicants not incumbents).

Many thanks,

Pat McCoy


>>> "Blair, Michael [HR]" <Michael.Blair at sprint.com<mailto:Michael.Blair at sprint.com>> 2011/11/15 12:25 PM >>>

Pat -
If by self-report you mean the numerous free personality tests floating around on the web, I think the answer is no even though many are based on more comprehensive assessments that have been validated.

Of course most personality tests are self-report measures and there are a variety of very good ones offered by reputable assessment firms that have been validated for numerous jobs.

Sent from my HTC on the Now Network from Sprint!
----- Reply message -----
From: "Patrick McCoy" <Patrick.McCoy at psc-cfp.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, Nov 15, 2011 10:58 am
Subject: [IPAC-List] Test taking advice for personality tests
To: "Rene Shekerjian" <Rene.Shekerjian at cs.state.ny.us>, "IPAC-List" <IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>, "Mark Hammer" <Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca>
Some (many?) of the self-report personality tools do seem to have overly
simplistic assumptions and probably can be "gamed" by many candidates.

Does anyone know of any self-report personality measures for which
there is sound evidence of validity when used with applicants to
professional jobs?

Pat McCoy
Ottawa, Canada



>>> "Shekerjian, Rene" <Rene.Shekerjian at cs.state.ny.us<mailto:Rene.Shekerjian at cs.state.ny.us>> 2011/11/15

11:21 AM >>>
Okay, devil's advocate here (gets ready to duck).

If the various "psych-out-the test" posting are correct in what they
identify as the correct answers to the integrity tests (and similar
instruments) used by stores such as Best Buy, then I can see how it
appears that they throw good candidates for a loop. And yes, I
understand that the tests may have been validated in some fashion.

However, if there is some truth to what they say, my sense is that if
you are extremely honest and thoughtful, and answer the questions
sincerely, there is a good chance you are going to come up with answers
that do not line up with the "key."

I freely admit that I do not know how integrity tests and
conscientiousness tests work other than from a very cursory standpoint.
But I will note that there is some substantial controversy in the IO
literature about how effective such tests are. And given that, is it not
reasonable for your average citizen to have doubts? And if that person
is trying to get a job and feels unjustly rejected, might that not
create some hard feelings?

Just a thought...

René

René Shekerjian | Testing Services Division | NYS Department of Civil
Service |
======================================================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hammer [mailto:Mark.Hammer at psc-cfp.gc.ca]
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 10:01 AM
To: IPAC-List
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Test taking advice for personality tests

What stands out most for me is the rather adversarial nature of the
site.  And of course, the posted comments only further express the
"us-vs-them" mentality many have adopted.

Now, I won't stand up and proclaim that ALL employers know what
they're
doing when it comes to using personality instruments for selection
purposes, or approach selection with only benevolence in mind, but at
least one of the objectives is to place people in jobs they will be
happy in because they are well-suited to it.  Why on earth people
would
wish to mis-portray themselves to be able to weasel into jobs they
will
likely not intend to stay in is beyond me.  How they expect to receive
glowing performance reviews in positions that conflict with their
"natural tendencies" is also beyond me.

Having said that, you will note that the term used on the site is
personality "test", not personality instrument or battery or
assessment,
etc.  The comments are from high school students, who confuse what
they
typically encounter as "tests" with what the assessment tool is
supposed
to do.  All too often, they perceive "tests" as largely unethical
barriers to their further advancement.  As in "Hey, Mr. Hammer, I
studied really hard and came to class most of the time, with my phone
turned off most of the time, but you made the test too tricky/hard".

Personally, I think we have some homework to do with respect to
recasting assessment tools as a kind of match-making.  Rather than
"Are
you good enough to work for me?" (because most believe they are),
something more on the order of "Is this job right for you?" (where
"rejection" could be perceived as a benevolent act).

Mark Hammer
Ottawa


>>> Joel Wiesen <jwiesen at appliedpersonnelresearch.com<mailto:jwiesen at appliedpersonnelresearch.com>> 2011/11/14 9:46

AM >>>
FWIW, found on the web:

http://www.ehow.com/how_4446746_pass-preemployment-personality-test.html



--
Joel P. Wiesen, Ph.D., Director
Applied Personnel Research
62 Candlewood Road
Scarsdale, NY 10583-6040
(617) 244-8859
http://appliedpersonnelresearch.com




Note: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and/or
legally privileged information. Please do not forward any contents
without permission. If you have received this message in error please
destroy all copies, completely remove it from your computer, and
notify

the sender. Thank you.

_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org<mailto:IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list


>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt
from
disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
the message and any copies.

>

Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en
titre
et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
supprimer le courriel et les copies.


_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org<mailto:IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list


>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
the message and any copies.
 >
Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre
et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
supprimer le courriel et les copies.

_______________________________________________________
IPAC-List
IPAC-List at ipacweb.org<mailto:IPAC-List at ipacweb.org>
http://www.ipacweb.org/mailman/listinfo/ipac-list

________________________________

This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.


>

This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any copies.

>

Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et supprimer le courriel et les copies.

________________________________

This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.