Archive for the ‘
Personality Tests ’ Category
Sunday, April 17th, 2011
One of the most interesting discussion panels at the conference concentrated on the movement of internet activity to cell phones and other mobile devices. As we noted in a previous article, I-O Psychologists were playing catch-up with the internet in the design and utilization of psychometric tests. Things are moving fast in the IT age and more and more applications are becoming available on mobile devices. With this comes an expectation from clients of psychometric tests along with their candidates that tests should be made available on the devices.
There are some obvious advantages in using these mobile devices to administer online psychometric tests to candidates. Advantages include making the tests more inclusive. Research data shows that in many parts of the world, even where people may lack a home computer with internet access, they do have a cell phone with such connectivity. A number of large organizations provide downloadable apps for cell phones that assist in job searches. At the current time, whilst candidates can find out about job openings and even start to apply for jobs, most organizations do not allow psychometric testing within the same app and thus the candidate needs to be able to relocate themselves to a connected desktop computer at some point. Providing follow through for all stages of the initial recruitment process in the app will likely make the candidate experience more positive, result in more candidates actually following through and enhance an organization’s “connected” image.
However, the discussion addressed a number of potential negative issues that clients and I-O Psychologists themselves need to be aware of in moving psychometric tests to mobile devices. One of the biggest issues in ensuring psychometric test validity is standardization. PsyAsia constantly reinforces during our psychometric training courses that to mess up in terms of standardization is also to mess up in terms of reliability which in turn impacts upon test validity. Mobile device platforms differ much more than desktop platforms. One needs to consider operating system, screen resolution, reliability of the internet connection and even where the user is at the time of testing. There was little chance of the candidate taking their desktop with them to the local bar and to complete the test there. As laptops became more accessible price-wise, there was more chance. Now, with cell phones there is a high chance. So, if the candidate gets stuck on a question, perhaps they just ask a friend or even a stranger in the bar! The environment has become much more difficult to control now and hence standardization is at threat. There will need to be tests of differential item functioning for each type of mobile device and given that in the USA 33% white, 46% black and 51% Hispanic have Smartphones according to recent research, further research needs to address possible differential performance by subgroup.
Given that there are so many different smartphones or mobile devices and a multitude of operating systems, the support required by candidates must also be forecast to increase. Candidates need to have a positive experience of the testing process and providing poor support will detract from this and may mean that test candidates don’t make deadlines for testing.
In conclusion, it seems that we are going to need to accept that testing will take place on mobile devices. We may however not be able to offer all types of tests – items may be dictated by what mobile applications allow us to do and by the performance of various types of items in pilot tests. It’s likely that given these issues, the testing industry will probably go with the lowest common acceptable and workable denominator.
As always, PsyAsia will ensure that we are at the cutting edge of these developments and be ready to offer advice to candidates and clients. In the meantime however, there is perhaps a need for updating and rethinking of guidelines on psychological test use to encompass testing on mobile devices. This goes to show just how fast things are moving given that at last year’s SIOP conference in Atlanta the test committee reported they were nearly ready to publish revised testing guidelines (which did not include thought on mobile testing!). Oh dear, they need revising again!!
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
Friday, April 15th, 2011
PsyAsia Live at SIOP: PsyAsia’s consultants are currently attending the SIOP Conference in Chicago and posting brief summaries of the most interesting talks they attend. Here is one of them!
We attended an interesting presentation on employee engagement. It was frightening to see how all of the panellists had a different explanation and operationalization as to what engagement is. Why is this shocking? Because as a science, I-O Psychology should agree on constructs such as this so that research goes ahead in such a way that results can be aggregated and compared. That said, one of the presenters noted how custom definitions of engagement are good from a client’s practical standpoint. What is seen as engagement in one organization may not be seen as such in another. Thus I would suggest that scientifically we need to work to establish a clear definition of engagement for research purposes whilst allowing flexibility in its practical use.
One of the presenters noted how there is often confusion between engagement and satisfaction. They are definitely related in that those who are engaged are often satisfied and those who are satisfied are often engaged, However, they are separate constructs. Engagement is more about what the employee will give to the organization, whereas satisfaction is more concerned with what the employee gets. According to the panel, there are both behavioural and emotional/feeling elements to being engaged and the organization needs to seek out both. One of the most interesting points of the presentation was the recognition from research of how in many organizations, employees are perfectly aligned to the organization’s values and cultures and highly engaged and yet the organization does not have a system in place to manage that engagement – what the employee does with their behaviours! This may result eventually in actually disengaging engaged employees and should be taken seriously by any organization looking to engage and motivate employees over the long-term.
Visit PsyAsia International for Psychometric Tests, Human Resource Training and Business Psychology Consultancy
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
Friday, April 15th, 2011
PsyAsia Live at SIOP: PsyAsia’s consultants are currently attending the SIOP Conference in Chicago and posting brief summaries of the most interesting talks they attend. Here is one of them!
The start to this presentation was interesting as the presenter pointed out how online psychometric testing was like a train that had left the station and we as psychologists were playing catch up. That’s very true, especially in the case of unproctored (unsupervised) testing. There was a push from industry to provide unsupervised tests. Some test publishers pushed ahead and only considered the ramifications later, others held back and only allowed their tests to go online and unproctored once they had seen what happened to others. In addition, there have of course been new publishers since the dawn of online testing and these guys have had the benefit of being able to develop their tests with internet assessment in mind.
The presentation focussed more on ability tests and the issue of cheating. A psychologist from Cox pointed out that their policy is to trust applicants even at the early stages given that they have a culture of trust within the organization. So, the question is, are they right in being so trusting or can candidates cheat tests in some way. Another panellist pointed out that if cheating was occurring there should theoretically be different score distributions for the cheaters versus the non-cheaters and in fact in his research he was not able to find any significantly different score distributions. From the evidence presented it did appear that as a whole, candidates do take the assessment processes seriously and do provide accurate data.
However, one does need to keep in mind that the results were based on research with a number of groups of individuals and that in critical roles, if just one person cheats and the decision-maker is unaware of this, there will be negative implications. Research is showing us that cheating is not a worrisome issue with unproctored tests and that is good news. Yet what about that one person, once in a while, who asks somebody else to complete his online aptitude test on his behalf? If this person makes it through the remainder of the recruitment process, one can expect problems later. This of course is costly for the organization.
The best approach then is perhaps to take comfort in the fact that most candidates appear to be honest in the unproctored psychometric testing process, whilst keeping in mind that the odd person may make it through whilst being dishonest and undetected. As per the guidelines of the International Test Commission, it is therefore still a useful policy to re-test any candidate with a supervised, parallel form of the same test at the final stages of the recruitment/selection process.
All of PsyAsia’s aptitude tests and some of our personality assessments have different versions for unproctored and proctored assessment. To view our Psychometric Tests, click here.
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
Friday, April 8th, 2011
PsyAsia at SIOP
PsyAsia International will be at the SIOP annual conference in the USA next week. This year the conference will be held in Chicago from 14-16 April. Over the years, the SIOP conference has proven beyond a doubt to be the best conference that we attend and the one that we most look forward to. There is a great mix of theory and practice, excellent keynotes, and some of the world’s most talented and leading figures in our industry present there.
The SIOP Conference
SIOP stands for Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Our director is a full member and a reviewer for the conference. Each year we see presentations related to psychometrics (e.g., the use of global norm groups), psychometric testing best practice (e.g., the development of revised guidelines for the use of psychometric tests in the workplace), Human Resource Management (e.g., how to effectively manage mergers and acquisitions or how to develop talented leaders) and research and practice in Organizational Psychology (e.g., masterclasses on statistics or the use of 360 performance appraisal in international settings). When we attend some other conferences, we sometimes find we need to try to fill time between presentations we want to attend. Not at SIOP. Here, our biggest problem is that we can’t be in two places at once. There are so many interesting and relevant talks going on that from 8am to 4pm we’re flat out running between them!
PsyAsia Live At SIOP – Alerts and Summaries
In between all this running around, PsyAsia Psychologists will be twittering and writing brief blog updates for our PSYASIA LIVE AT SIOP facility. After attending presentations, we’ll provide a brief summary for our clients back in Asia so that they remain informed of the latest scientifically validated and peer-reviewed developments in this field. The frequency of posts will vary depending upon which of our media routes you are subscribed to. Twitter will be the most frequently updated but contain very short updates, at times with links to longer articles. Like us on Facebook to have similar updates appear on your facebook page. Our blogs at PsyAsia.com and PsychometricAssessment.com will contain longer summaries of presentations. Those subscribed to our Psychometric Assessment Blog updates will receive an email with a link to all summaries in their usual weekly update email. To subscribe to that list, go here. We may also manage to upload a brief video or two to our YouTube Chanel. So, feel free to subcribe to any of these media outlets and then sit back and enjoy PsyAsia Live at SIOP – we know we will!
What is I-O Psychology?
According to SIOP:
Industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology is the scientific study of the workplace. Rigor and methods of psychology are applied to issues of critical relevance to business, including talent management, coaching, assessment, selection, training, organizational development, performance, and work-life balance.
PsyAsia International and I-O Psychology
PsyAsia International has been offering I-O Psychology services, training and consulting in Asia from main offices in Hong Kong and Singapore (and feeder offices in Malaysia, Pakistan and the UK) for almost 10 years. Our consultants are registered psychologists and members of international psychology associations, such as the American, British and Australian Psychological Societies. The influence of I-O Psychology is steadily growing in Asia as people (especially the Human Resources Profession) begin to understand the remarkable benefits and the scientific focus of this profession. PsyAsia International has been passionate and proactive in increasing the relevance and knowledge of I-O Psychology in Asia since our inception and to this end we act as supervisors to intern psychologists from Asian and Australian universities and have various programs to enhance knowledge and understanding of the profession. As Psychologists we are answerable to Professional Practice Registration Boards in terms of our competence and ethics. This is unique in the HR Profession where many who call themselves consultants have no need to ensure continued development, ethical practices and competence! This protects our clients and ensures tangible results from seasoned professionals with passion for their subject area.
View our Psychometric Tests, Human Resource Training Courses, Business Psychology Consulting Services and Online Training in Psychometrics and HRM
Cutting_Edge_Psychometrics,_HRM_&_Organizational_Psychology_-_PsyAsia_Live_at_SIOP_2011_Chicago.docx Download this file
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
Wednesday, April 6th, 2011
PsyAsia International is pleased to announce that the NEW Online Express Training Course for the Apollo Profile, named Apollo Module 1, is now ready! It’s been designed to be part of a wider series of online learning courses in psychometric tests. Module 1 covers the absolute basics of using the Apollo Online Personality Questionnaire and does so in around one hour. Upon completion, users are presented with a brief quiz and upon passing that will be able to use special pre-interpreted Apollo Profile reports. To sign up for the course, please visit our Online Learning Centre and choose the Apollo Profile Basic Personality Assessment Course.
For a limited time we are offering this course at 50% off the regular price. This offer is open for the next 4 weeks only! The discount is already reflected in the fee found at the learning centre. Fees will increase in 4 week’s time!
The Apollo Profile is an Online Personality Assessment that compares candidates to those rated as excellent in various occupational groups from sales to executive management. It was developed by Psychometrician and Head of Psychology Department at Bond University, Professor Richard Hicks, and management consultant, Jim Bowden. Apollo is used by many leading organisations, including KPMG, Hudson, Chanel, Ford, Air New Zealand, DBS Bank, Philips Electronics and more. View a selection of different Apollo reports here
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
Monday, April 4th, 2011
In this complimentary webinar, PsyAsia International’s registered business psychologist will review aspects of the Saville Consulting Wave. The Wave is the 21st Century’s Revolution in Personality Assessment. It was developed by the best known name in modern Psychometrics, Professor Peter Saville. Independent, comparative research has shown that the validity of the Wave surpasses that usually expected of personality tests and that the tool beats its competitors in predicting performance and leadership at work. In fact, Wave has been so influential that its nearest rival felt the need to revisit their own personality test and to use the term revolution too in their update. However, it turned out to be a revamping rather than a revolution!! So, what makes the Wave such a fantastic tool. Why has Saville Consulting grown so fast over the past few years from nothing to representation in over 60 countries and a move to a larger office to house their growing team?Â
This webinar will take attendees through the revolutionary characteristics of the Wave in an accessible way. You’ll also get to see the validity study results. After attending the webinar, you’ll understand why the Saville Consulting Wave has been so well received and why it has changed the status quo in psychometric personality testing that has existed since the 1980s.
The complimentary webinar is open to all HR and related professionals in Asia who provide truthful data and a corporate email address when registering. It is not open to competitors. The webinar runs on 26 April 2011 at 12pm Singapore/Hong Kong time.
To register, please visit http://webinars.psyasia.com
More on the Saville Consulting Wave Psychometric Personality Assessment
Posted in
Free Webinars & Online Learning, Personality Tests, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection, Savile Consulting Wave Training, Saville Consulting Wave, Saville Consulting Wave, Saville Wave Training |
No Comments »
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011
|
Apollo Select
Candidate Assessment & Tracking System
Psychometric Personality Test
Apollo Select assists HR staff in tracking applicants through the selection process. You choose competencies and apply weightings. The system is customisable to your own competencies. Your candidate completes the Apollo Psychometric Personality Test and you can view overall matching and ranking for each of your candidates easily. View the 4 minute demonstration video here.
For a limited time we are trialling a subscription model for Apollo Select.
US$99 per month
first month at half-price (US$99 US$49.50)
or pay one year in advance – get 2 months free – just US$990 per year
Additional offer… for the next 2 weeks only…
also get 10 free Apollo Credits with an annual subscription
Apollo Select usually sells for thousands of US dollars! For a trial period however, we are making this invaluable tool available on a subscription basis to our Asia and Middle East clients. Note that if and when we remove the option of a subscription package, clients who are at that time subscribed will be able to continue to enjoy Apollo Select under subscription. New clients and those who cancelled their subscription will need to purchase Apollo Select at the market rate at that time. Note that the subscription is for the special Select System. Clients still need to pay on a per candidate basis for the Apollo Profile
The Apollo Profile is an Online Personality Assessment that compares candidates to those rated as excellent in various occupational groups from sales to executive management. It was developed by Psychometrician and Head of Psychology Department at Bond University, Professor Richard Hicks, and management consultant, Jim Bowden. Apollo is used by many leading organisations, including KPMG, Hudson, Chanel, Ford, Air New Zealand, DBS Bank, Philips Electronics and more. View a selection of different Apollo reports here.
|
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
Monday, March 28th, 2011
| Predicting talent with psychometric tests |
 |
 |
 |
| Written for & Published in HR Magazine: Recruitment |
| Friday, 25 February 2011 |
|
By Dr Graham Tyler, Registered Business Psychologist,
Chartered Scientist and Executive Director at PsyAsia International: www.psyasia.com
Absolute objectivity
Psychometric tests are tools designed to assess psychological attributes such as aptitude and personality in an objective and quantitative manner. There has been over sixty years of research in this field and it is well documented that—psychometric tests, when used properly by trained individuals, add significantly to the ability of HR to select the best candidate for the job.
Organisations which have adopted more ‘scientific’ human resource processes usually incorporate psychometrics into their approach. Psychometrics is probably the only aspect of the selection process that allows for absolutely objective assessment of candidates. Moreover, they allow HR to assess large numbers of candidates in very short periods of time, which would be immaterial if the test did not do its job properly. However, research has shown that the ability of tests to predict successful hires often exceeds that of traditional interviews. Generally, aptitude tests have been shown to be more predictive of success than personality tests, although there are a couple of notable personality tools that are also on par with aptitude tests.
There are numerous tests currently on the market and many distributors in Hong Kong—so how can HR be certain they are choosing the right test and choosing to work with the right distributor? Two videos are available giving advice to those in HR on the right and wrong questions to ask psychometric test distributors and can be viewed via the link below.
VIDEO LINK: The right and wrong questions to ask psychometric test distributors
Professional understanding
Given that psychometric tests measure psychological characteristics, HR are advised to try and work with registered business psychologists, who will have the benefit of years of training in the psychology of people at work. Doctoral psychologists have the same level and years of training and experience as medical doctors, and can only re-register each year if they have undertaken significant professional development. In this respect, professionally qualified psychologists will have a much better understanding of psychometric tests. Some test distributors may have only undergone a few days of training in the tests they sell and will lack a proper understanding of the science and metrics beneath the tests, and are not accountable to anybody for their competence.
Which test?
As for choice of test, this poses a perennial problem for those without training in psychometrics. Many, new to the field, will ask which companies use a particular test—which would then require the distributor to break commercial confidence. Alternatively, HR may come pre-armed with the name of the test they want to use because a friend’s organisation uses that particular test. In fact, such recommendations should have little bearing on test choice, as tests have been designed for different situations and different people. A friend may have chosen their test when there was less market choice, and it may no longer be the best one currently available. So HR is advised to survey all tests currently available and select one that best suits their individual requirements bearing in mind the following key concerns.
How many questions?
One of the most frequently asked questions regarding personality tests is, “How many questions are there in the test.” When we reply with, “200” there is usually a gasp—it should be noted that the reliability, and therefore the validity, of tests generally increases with the number of questions—provided the test is not ridiculously long. Most good tests, which assess multiple relevant aspects of personality for work, do so with around 200 questions. Personality tests cannot do their job well with the 20-50 questions that many in HR may expect. This is one reason why some test distributors do not offer free trials, as a test cannot be evaluated on the basis of the questions alone. Trial users may also be discouraged by long questionnaires and repetition of questions—when in fact this results in higher reliability and a better measure of candidate consistency and attention.
Locally or internationally developed?
There has been a movement that supports Chinese Personality tests that are ‘designed by the Chinese for the Chinese’. The idea may sound sensible and quite seductive, however, research published in the British Psychological Society’s Selection & Development Review, entitled: The Chinese challenge to the Big-5, indicated that locally-developed tests lacked the rigour of internationally-developed ones and had unacceptable reliability levels. Additionally, they had no incremental validity over internationally developed tests. Traditionally, Chinese culture may place greater importance on certain aspects of personality, such as ‘face’, than other cultures, however, our research did not demonstrate that this had any utility in helping to predict candidate performance at work in Hong Kong companies.
Overcoming inertia
If psychometric tests are so useful, why does every organisation not use them? Firstly, cost—and many in procurement may not consider the return on investment. Every aspect of the selection process incurs costs. However, as capital invested in psychometric tests is usually paid to a vendor rather than to in-house staff, this often acts as a further deterrent to purchasing them in the first place. HR can help by explaining the tangible ROI benefits of psychometric tests to those in procurement so they are better aware that using good tests results in superior prediction of talent performance, which will lead to higher retention rates, lower absenteeism, a happier workforce and ultimately a more successful organisation.
Test administrator training essential
As with any new procedure, adopting psychometric tests requires planning, a company policy on test use, fairness, competence in testing, etc. and this all takes time and can be off-putting. HR is often surprised by the need for training test administrators. Proper training is, however, extremely important so that the HR staff administering tests and making decisions based the results know how to use and analyse them properly. Less reputable test suppliers may succumb to the reticence of organisations to train staff by offering tests that require little or no training, however, this is likely to fuel misunderstandings, misinterpretation and ill-informed decisions. For example, if a candidate scores low on an empathy scale—without proper understanding of the test—some may assume they have little empathy. In reality, the scale always means more than its label and the greatest validity can only be obtained from interpreting interactions of scores among multiple scales. Furthermore, interpretation in selection varies significantly depending on whether tests are used with ‘forced-choice questions’ or ‘rating scales’.
As in any assessment method, there is a degree of error in psychometric test scores and this must also be taken into account during interpretation. Quality psychometric training courses will help educate administrators how to do this. The best training courses also teach the right questions to ask distributors and how to evaluate the response—from asking for reliability and validity figures, to understanding the rationale behind the test itself and the test publisher’s background.
Training bloopers
Non-psychologists, who run training programmes, may lack a comprehensive understanding of the field. One trainer for a well-known personality type tool told his class that criterion-related validity was most important for his test—the reality being that construct validity is. The manager at a profiling company in Hong Kong told an enquirer that his questions were getting too complicated and most clients don’t get that technical. The client was only asking the questions they were taught on a six-day British Psychological Society course. One supplier defined test validity as being ‘how accurately the candidate believes the test represents them’ and claimed their tests average 95% validity. In fact, there are many types of technical validity and this is not recognised as one of them. So, HR should be cautious with validity claims that seem too good to be true—check exactly how the supplier defines the term ‘validity’. More credible suppliers would provide evidence that the test significantly predicts meaningful workplace performance variables. This evidence should come from a sizable sample of employees rather than students in universities.
Top 5 questions to ask suppliers
- What is the rationale or theory behind the test—is it a validated theory?
- May I see evidence of the test’s reliability? Look for internal consistency and test—retest reliabilities of 0.7+ for personality tests and 0.8+ for aptitude tests. Reliability is a precursor to validity.
- May I see evidence of the test’s validity? Look for either criterion-related validity or construct-related validity depending on how you will be using the test. You need to see that the test predicts something meaningful or accurately assesses your construct of interest.*
- What training is required to use the test?
- Do you employ experts in psychometrics, such as business psychologists, rather than test salespeople who are not experts in psychometrics or psychology?
*Notes
Criterion-related validity is evidence that the test actually predicts what it says it does, for example, leadership potential or performance on various competencies.
Construct-related validity is evidence that the test really does assess the construct it was designed to measure, for example, numerical reasoning or conscientiousness.
Conclusion
In summary, psychometric tests have an established record of being able to predict the skills and performance of potential hires and new recruits. However, for them to be effective, it is crucial that HR first equips itself with the right test. In order to choose the right test, HR needs to ask the right questions to suppliers so they can gain a proper understanding of the technical properties of the test, rather than simply relying on colleague recommendations. Psychometric tests are here to stay and both test vendors and HR have a responsibility to ensure competent and ethical test use and thus accurate and fair prediction of talent and performance in Hong Kong’s workplaces.
For more details visit: www.psychometricassessment.com
|
Posted in
Personality Tests |
No Comments »
|
|
|
