"The Bert Davis Team, and in particular Wendy Baker with whom I have worked extensively, not only has a deep and comprehensive understanding of the magazine industry, but also the instinct and the resources to find what we are searching for"

Karyn Gallant-Zitomer
Director of Corporate Human Resources
Condé Nast

Pre-Employment Testing: The Top Line

By Angela Sciurba

Combined with traditional interviewing practices, pre-employment testing is an effective tool to avoid costly hiring mistakes. Employers can gain valuable insight by testing candidates’ cognitive/intellectual abilities, as well as their personalities, to choose the candidate who will fit best with the company culture.

Before engaging in pre-employment testing, it is essential to clearly define the position you are trying to fill. Outlining what is expected from each position allows employers to choose the kind of testing that will be most effective. Clearly defined job descriptions help to most efficiently test for and subsequently hire the best candidate. Comprehensive analyses can be expensive and are more commonly reserved for professionals at the senior management level, and basic testing is more common at lower levels.

Pre-employment testing can minimize subjectivity in traditional methods of hiring. Ben Dattner, an industrial and organizational psychologist and independent consultant, states that the most important aspect of testing is validity – “how well the test battery actually predicts on-the-job performance.”

“Testing, when used in combination with behavioral interviews, can substantially increase the ‘hit rate’ in terms of the success of new hires,” Dattner says. “The more independent and validated sources of data that are included in the evaluation process, the less likely there is to be inaccuracy based on biases or subjective judgments.”

Pre-employment assessments also help to identify potential limitations of a candidate, even one identified as most ideal for a position. Once these limitations are identified, a program of “on-boarding,” or utilizing a career coaching plan, can be implemented as an effective way to transition the new hire into the company and address potential problems before they arise. Bill Cassidy, President of The Human Resource Partnership, says that the on-boarding process has been a “phenomenally successful” tool for many corporations he has worked with.

 

Choosing the Right Pre-Employment Assessment

By Kristi Johnston

While pre-employment testing can be a beneficial aid in the hiring process, it is important for companies to ensure that the tests they choose for each position provide the most accurate and complete measurement of candidates’ abilities.

According to The Human Resource Partnership, LLC, a human resources advisory firm, there are several categories of pre-employment tests, including: Cognitive Abilities Tests (such as the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Test and the Wonderlic Personnel Test); Personality and Temperament Tests (such as the Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey); and Sales Abilities Tests (such as the Sigma Survey for Sales Professionals).

Inc. magazine’s Stephanie Clifford suggests that both personality tests and cognitive tests are helpful: “While cognitive tests have a slightly closer correlation with job success, personality tests are useful both as a basis for interview questions and for subsequent development. For the best results, companies should use both sorts of tests or a single test that combines the two elements” (“The New Science of Hiring,” August 2006).

When choosing which test to use in the hiring process, there are several factors to take into account, as outlined in Harcourt Assessment’s Best Practice Guide for Selecting a Pre-Employment Assessment (©2007). Examples of questions to ask before deciding on an assessment include:

• Does this assessment measure qualities and/or abilities that are essential to job performance?
• Is the assessment appropriate for the level of the position being filled?
• Is the assessment accurate? Are its results consistent?
• Is the assessment un-biased?

It seems there are as many potential assessments to use in the decision-making process as there are candidates in the applicant pool. Choosing one that can most accurately and effectively predict the ideal candidate, in terms of both job skills and fitting into the corporate culture, can be an invaluable tool in the hiring process.

 

Pre-Employment Testing: The Bottom Line

By Pamela Gussow

As with many Human Resources issues, there is debate over the pros and cons of pre-employment testing. However, there are several key factors that prove that pre-employment testing is a beneficial measure to adapt for most companies.

By delving deeper into specific skills and/or personality traits, pre-employment assessment tests are able to better qualify, and in some cases disqualify, candidates. This means that employees who are hired are much more likely to be a better fit on a deeper level with a job and organization. In turn, these employees are more likely to succeed in the job at hand and stay in the position, and with the company, longer.

While reduced turnover in itself is good for the reputation of organizations, pre-employment assessments also positively impact employee morale. Lisa Amaya Price, HR Director at Weber Shandwick, a leading global public relations firm, explains, “If the employer has shown [candidates] through the tests what is important to their success at the company, it helps them also decide if the job is right for them. If this results in higher retention/lower turnover, then of course that is good for morale.”

Furthermore, although assessments can be expensive, by helping to reduce turnover, they actually can help companies drastically cut costs. In an article in the Star Tribune, Dr. John Schinnerer, CEO and Chief Strategist of InfiNet Assessment, explains, “The consensus is that pre-hire assessments, when properly designed and implemented, can significantly impact the bottom line… Typical financial benefits often run into the millions of dollars depending upon the increase in validity from the old hiring method (e.g., interviews) to the new hiring method (e.g., assessments and interviews), the number of positions filled, and the number of applicants per opening.”