Personality (Thought Item For Ob)

Opening

In an attempt to hire the best possible candidate and to properly analyze current workers, many companies have used some form of personality testing to attempt to better know their employees. Personality testing has shown the employers are desperately trying to fit the perfect person into the perfect position. Some of the "master chefs" of the selection business are paying special attention to the new chemistry between personality tests, competency requirements, and behavioural interviewing. But is the process of personality testing truly accurate? This paper will go into detail about how personality testing came to pass and how it evolved into the present environment. Furthermore, it will elaborate two major arguments as to why personality testing is not an adequate method of the hiring process and, mainly, how these arguments are addressed and dealt with by the creators of the tests.

The Beginning of Personality Testing

Although the origin of personality testing isn't exactly known, but the term "personality testing", when it comes to employment, is fairly specific. Fredrick Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management, published in 1911, popularized the notion that employee skills are quantifiable. Taylor's time-and-motion studies sought to determine seemingly precise aspects, for example, "How many times a minute should [a secretary] be able to open and close a file drawer?". This basic form of personality testing was very vague and the spurt of personality testing never really took off until 1919 when Henry C. Link's Employment Psychology stated:

The ideal employment method is undoubtedly an immense machine which would receive applicants of all kinds at one end, automatically sort, interview, and record them, and finally turn them out at the other end nicely labelled with the job which they are to do.

Personality Testing in Today's Environment

As with so many other practices, things tend to become much more accurate as time goes by. More theories arise and general standards are not far behind. This is very true when it comes to personality testing. Many hiring agents flock towards personality testing as they "are mathematically sound, legally defensible, and predictive of a person's job performance". These tests cover practically anything an employer should need, from basic intelligence to observational skills. With all these areas of available testing, problems do tend to arise. Two major problems are that many organizations could be testing for the wrong information and organizations could also be using a test that was not created to such a purpose. For example, as stated in an article on personality testing, "some of the oldest, best-known, and best-researched tests were developed to detect pathology in the general population. While they might be excellent predictors of tendencies towards violence or dishonesty, they are generally not predictors of a person's "bright side"-the collection of visible personality characteristics that make normal people different from one another. The bright side also has to do with the ways in which personality predisposes a candidate to be a contributor." It seems that some employers will administer a test without an overview to see if it is actually necessary. Is personality testing really appropriate in every hiring situation, are they collecting necessary information and what complications does personality testing cause to rise?

The Argument

When faced with a test, potential employees may see it as a pass or fail method of hiring. Simply put, if they answer the questions in a way that they think will please their employer, they will greatly increase their chances to be hired. This train of thought triggers the mind to think of what a particular person (the hiring party) would want as the answer instead of what the individual would normally answer. I believe that this way of thinking is done partially in an unconscious state of mind, meaning that we overstress ourselves as to what the answer should be when the actual "correct" answer really doesn't exist and varies from person to person. So this leaves the question, Can an applicant 'outsmart' a personality test? There are also problems on the test takers side of the situation. For example, if an applicant receives a test and feels that the test doesn't allow the applicant to properly show his or her skills that will benefit the corporation, that person will most likely try to fake the test to get an opportunity to better present themselves in the second or third interview.

Another big concern when testing for personality traits is if the employer is administrating the correct test. Personality testing has become very concentrated and there are many different variations available so, possibly to save money or just due to a lack of knowledge of what they are purchasing, ensuring that the correct information is acquired. This could easily lead to undesirable information being obtained about the tested individuals thus making the test a complete waste. These arguments, properly supported, only begin to show the flaws in personality testing. Perhaps this testing is not the best way to go about hiring new employees

The Justification

Most test publishers would