Archive for the ‘ Recruitment & Selection ’ Category

Psychometric Testing in Singapore, Hong Kong and across Asia

Tuesday, August 10th, 2010

Introduction

Psychologist Vincent Wong carried out a review of psychometric tests being used in Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia and throughout Asia. In this analysis, more than 40 tests were reviewed which involved no less than 20 test developers. There were several focuses in the analysis which included practical information of the tests (information such as price and practical design issues), construct of the test, report design, technical details and training requirements.

Practical Information

Pricing

There exists a wide pricing range among tests developed by different test developers. In the lower end of the continuum one test provider provides tests for free in their entire product range and a section of the chargeable report will be produced. Obviously for user to obtain useful information they have to pay for the full report and this is certainly a marketing strategy. However in the perspective of psychometric this practice serious harm the integrity of the test as anybody can get access to the tests for unlimited number of times. Therefore it can only been seen as tests for people who are interested in trying out tests, rather than being usable in organizational settings. For more protected tests, prices range from USD$10 to more than USD$120 with some of the providers charge per usage while the others charge for subscription fee as well (usually paid annually).

Design

In this analysis, several design dimensions of the test were considered and they were the split between ipsative and normative measures, the type of scales that were employed, and other practical issue like medium of test administration.

The majority of the personality assessment tools (over 80%) employ normative measures (the type of psychometric tools that compare the respondent with a group of similar others, or the norm group) while the remaining ones employ an ipsative style (the type of psychometric tools that determine the preference among different personality traits within the respondent). Two exceptional case was identified which employs a mixed style, i.e. normative plus ipsative. The reason behind the popularity of normative style might down to the fact that for tests that were designed for selection purpose normative style was the better style to go with as it actually compare the respondents with the others. On the other hand ipsative measures can provide us with better knowledge about the preference or strength within the respondents. In line with this we found that most of the ipsative tests were preference or value tests which were designed for coaching or counselling purposes, although some ipsative measures that were designed for selection purposes were also identified. For the only tests that incorporated both normative and ipsative styles, the underlying connotation of the difference between normative and ipsative scales were utilized and it represented the discrepancy between the real and ideal self of the respondents.

The type of scale used by the tests is actually a function of whether they are ipsative or normative tests. For normative test the most popular scale type used was 5-point Likert Scale (Likert Scale is the type of scale that respondents choose among several options for the one that represent their thought most). 7-point scale was also quite common and there were a few occurrences of 3-point and 9-point scales. Other than using Likert scales, a few normative tests employed true or false scale. For ipsative tests force-choice scale was employed. One of the more popular version of ipsative scales asked the respondents to pick the option that describes them the best (usually termed as ‘most like me’) as well as option that describes them the worst (usually termed as ‘least like me’). Another appearing version of ipsative scale asked the respondents to put the available options into order, although this version was very uncommon.

Most of the surveyed tests, if not all, were designed for completing on computerized environment. While some of the tests can be administered online in an unsupervised manner, there were quite a few that required supervised administration. Whereas there were few test that provided different versions for supervised and unsupervised administration. Having more than one version allowed the result to be checked in a supervised manner after the candidates had passed the unsupervised session. Paper and pencil version of the tests were usually available with similar price of the computerized version although there were a few tests that did not provide paper and pencil version.

Although all the surveyed tests were not designed to be completed in a designated time, timer was identified in one test and it served the function of checking against random or thoughtful responses.

Measured Attributes

Personality

Among the different attributes, personality was the most popular one being measured. The majority of the personality measurements were built on the Big Five model of personality identified by Costa and McCrae (1985). While some of them retained the original five factors within the tests, about half of the surveyed tests restructured the factor compositions based on the result of the factor analysis or other theoretical support, for example one test split the factor of conscientiousness into ‘Industriousness’ and ‘Methodicalness’ while another developer incorporate the five factor model with behavioural tendencies and came up with a seven factor model. Another common phenomenon observed was that under each of the five factors the primary factors (ranges from 3-5 facets, also known as facets) were also measured, and they were actually more commonly used by test developers in report generation and interpretation. This was probably because the primary factors offer more detailed information thus higher flexibility in using them. Besides the Big Five model, another very popular personality model employed by test developers was Jung’s (1920) typology of personality. For instance two of the tests were developed from this theory as their entire theoretical foundation but one employed the original categorical model while the other one developed a continuum model. Besides building upon one theory, many tests extract personality factors from multiple personality theories and some of them measured as many as 34 personality dimensions. Example of the measured personality dimension includes ambition, initiative, concern for others, flexibility, and energy. Nearly most of the surveyed personality tests served multiple functions which included selection, training/development need analysis, counselling and other related applications such as personal development, conflict management and team building. Test developers further added the applicability of personality tests in different situations by providing multiple versions of reports alongside with a general personality profile.

Value, Motive and Preference

Another popular attributes being measured were value, motive and preference. Although these are three distinct attributes, we found it was common that test publisher combine either two or all three attributes into one test. These tests were less commonly employed in the situation of selection but more widely used in counselling and developmental scenarios, although some of them were also designed to be used in selection as well. For tests that measures value and motive, normative measures were found to be more common and ipsative measures were more common among preference tests. Another related attribute being measured was interest and they were mainly designed to be a career development tool.

Others

Other measured attributes included measure of leadership styles, team role, behavioural tendency, Emotional Intelligence, self-efficacy, work ethic, interpersonal communication, sales orientation, customer service orientation, learning style and even work effectiveness tendency.

Report Style

Nearly all of the surveyed tests have multiple reports and they are all in narrative form alongside with a graphic representation (usually bar charts) of the measured characteristic. However there was one test that did not employ narrative style in their report at all. Graphical representations with a sentence long description for each factor were employed instead of the narrative format. 2 dimensional typology graphs and score matrix were also employed for some type of reports. Some reports made use of different colours in representing different dimensions being measured yet some others used colour to indicate extreme scores (for example green representing high scores while red representing low scores). Colour was also frequently employed for matching test scores with a standard or an established profile, with green meaning a good match and red representing a poor match.

Report Content

Generic Personality Profile

For all the surveyed tests, there was at least some form of generic personality profile provided in the report, whether in the form of narrative writing, matrix of scores, 2 dimensional typology graphs, bar charts or broken line graphs. Most commonly the personality profile was consisted of a graphical representation of the test scores on different dimensions with a brief descriptive narrative alongside it. In this generic personality profile the test scores, usually in form of sten scores or percentile were presented. Raw scores were also found in some reports. About half of the survey tests also presented the variation of the test score in the report and a few had an explanation on the meaning behind that. In all cases primary dimensions measured by the tests were reported in this section. Secondary or higher-level composite dimensions were also frequently reported in this section.

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths and limitations were another very popular qualities being reported, although we identified a few tests that do not report them. In reporting strengths and limitations some tests referred them to very specific behavioural terms while there existed some tests simply referred high or low scores in particular dimensions as strengths or limitations. Few tests incorporated contextual factors into the reporting of strengths and limitations were identified and they were more common in purpose-specific reports (for example reports designed for leadership development or team building). Overall tests tended to present information about strengths and limitations of the candidates.

Competencies

Leadership, team work, interpersonal skills or orientation and problem solving orientation were found to be the most popular competencies being tapped. Other competencies being tackled by the surveyed tests included achievement orientation, customer service orientation, management style, decision making, planning and organization, influence and negotiation, delivery, creativity, analytic orientation, coping style and thinking style. Rather than being measured directly in the tests, these competencies were often generated from several primary dimensions of personality. They were found to be written in context of work and behavioural terms were employed heavily in order to aid comprehensibility of the report. Furthermore competency based reports were identified and leadership related reports were the one which appeared most. Competency based reports for sales and managerial positions were also popular.

Interview prompts

Interview prompts were found in some reports. These included general instruction of how to use the report correctly to enhance the effectiveness of a follow-up interview as well as specific suggested interview questions to be asked for a particular candidate. The number of interview prompts varies from three to ten plus suggested questions and some reports even included the expected answer from the candidate. These interview prompts also served as a check or back up of the validity of the tests.

Training (Development) Needs

Several tests with a separated training need or developmental report were identified. For tests that did not have a designated report for training needs, it was surprising to found that the section outlining training was absent for majority of the surveyed tests, given most of them were designed to be used in training need analysis. When present, the training needs outlined (or some tests referred it to be ‘action plans’) were usually generated from the unfit aspects identified or areas that were not up to the normative standard. Simple description about the needs per se was common and a few reports were found to be providing concrete training suggestions.

Cultural Fit

Cultural fit information was identified in a few test reports. This information could include the fit of the candidate with the organizational culture, task nature as well as co-workers and it existed in several forms. The more popular way to compute it was comparing between the candidate’s score with the norm or an ideal profile. One test generated this information by comparing the candidate with the best performers. Yet another test presented the information in light of the candidate himself by stating what culture or environment will be the best fit for the candidate.

Technical Information

Technical information of the test included normative data, reliability and validity data as well as development procedure of the test. They are the most important information to be readily accessible to the public but unfortunately some of them were virtually absent for some of the surveyed tests. Normative data were found to be the most reported information and reliability data followed. However evidence for validity as well as development procedure of the test were absent for some of the tests despite the claim of ‘scientifically validated’ in their marketing materials. For tests that did not provide any of the above mentioned information the integrity of them were seriously in doubt.

Training Requirement

Training requirement of the tests varied from no need training for an extreme case (which was the free online test) to BPS Level B plus additional training (approximately 7 days of training in total). For most of the tests 2-3 days of training for the specific test was common but this type of training would not be recognized by a different test provider. The BPS (British Psychological Society) Competence in Occupational Testing was found to be the most widely accepted qualification by the test providers. Most of the tests could be administered by a BPS Level B qualified user but there existed some tests which required a conversion training (1-2 days long) in order to be a qualified user of them.

Tags: aptitude test, online psychometric test training, online psychometric testing, Personality Assessment, Personality Test, personality test hong kong, personality test singapore, psychometric test, psychometric tests in asia, Psychometrics
Posted in Ability, Aptitude & Intelligence, British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing, Chinese Personality Testing, Personality Tests, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection | No Comments »

Chinese Personality Testing – Can Indigenous Tests Predict Work Performance?

Friday, July 30th, 2010

It’s perhaps quite natural to believe that the Chinese personality is so different to others that it requires a special psychometric test to assess it. What better way to sell your new Chinese personality test than to state that it is “high time a test for the Chinese” were developed. However, this throws doubt upon the utility of rigorously developed international psychometric tests of personality.

Given the above, we embarked on a research program to assess whether Chinese people differ significantly comparied to others in terms of personality structure and whether personality tests that purport to assess Chinese Personality are able to predict any more work performance than internationally developed tests have already been proven to do!

You can read our research findings it: personality.cn, our Chinese Personality at Work Research Site.

No time to read the whole site? Here’s a quick summary:

Locally developed psychometric tests which purport to assess “indigenous” aspects of Chinese Personality were found to be less reliable than reputable internationally developed tests of personality. Furthermore, there is a big question as to whether so-called “indigenous” traits are Chinese-specific. Issues such as traditionalism or face also exist in other cultures! Moreover, the research has demonstrated that whatever we choose to believe about Chinese Personality, locally developed (Hong Kong) tests of “indigenous” personality add nothing to the prediction of performance at work that is not already accounted for by reputable internationally developed personality tests.

We present this research in a free HRM webinar which you can watch here. We held a vote at the beginning and end of our webinar whereby we asked attendees if they believed that Chinese Personality is so different that Chinese people need their own personality test. At the beginning of the webinar, the majority of the attendees said yes! By the end of the webinar only one attendee still believed this to be the case! We recommend choosing well designed psychometric tests with high reliability and validity. Personality is a universal construct, thus locally developed tests may have little benefit to the hiring manager!

Tags: chinese personality test, HRM, hrm webinars, human resource management, human resources, online psychometric testing, Performance at Work, Performance Management, Personality Assessment, Personality Test, personality test hong kong, personality test singapore, Personality Tests, Recruitment, reliability of psychometrics, validity of psychometrics
Posted in Chinese Personality Testing, Free Webinars & Online Learning, HRM, HRM Training, Human Resources Articles (General), Performance at Work, Personality Tests, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection | No Comments »

Online Psychometric Test Mini-Course: Lesson 3

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010

In this session we will explore the following:

1. Why psychometric tests are used and how they are useful. We will do this by referring mainly to alternative methods of assessment.

The short answer to the first part of the above question is that psychometric tests are used because (assuming they are well designed tests) they are a reliable and valid means of assessing people. We will discuss in a future session exactly what is mean by reliability and validity when applied to psychometrics.

Let’s consider a few alternatives to psychometric tests and highlight this issue further.

Unstructured Interviews

Most candidates who apply for a job will expect to have an interview at some stage of the process and indeed, most organisations will work an interview into the process. However, how useful is this interview for predicting performance on the job? This depends a lot on the training of those who will be interviewing. Many people who conduct interviews have never been trained. Perhaps one day a boss asked them to go and interview a candidate for a job and it continued from there. They may have years of experience but experience and competence are not the same. Most people who interview use what is known as the traditional interview. It is also sometimes called an unstructured interview. The idea is that this is a time to meet with and get to know the job applicant. Often the interviewer is thinking things such as:

“Let’s see if he has a firm handshake.”

“Let’s see if he looks me in the eye.”

“I’ll ask him what he does in his spare time.”

The problem is that none of the answers to these questions will predict performance at work. So what if I have a limp handshake? Donald Trump (very successful property tycoon) does not even like to shake hands – he’s worried about germs! Imagine him at a job interview. The shake would be very limp if at all. In some cultures it’s rude to look people in the eye – so we cannot go assuming that those who avoid eye contact will not be good performers or that they are dishonest or hiding something. As for spare time, what about somebody who puts together model cars or aeroplanes on the weekend, does it mean that will be a good designer or engineer. No, this may simply be a low level weekend interest and not something that would keep them entertained as a career. Not to mention the fact that in some parts of the world it’s actually illegal to ask about people’s hobbies in a job selection process!

The point to grasp then is that often the people conducting interviews have little or no training and are running unstructured interviews that have little relevance to job performance and therefore lack both reliability and validity. However, the suggestion is not that we remove interviews totally!

Structured Interviews

Research has shown that interviews have good reliability and validity when run in a particular way by those who have undergone thorough training. These are called structured interviews. The idea here is to align the interview questions to the competencies required of the candidate to be successful in the job. Then the interviewer asks the same or very similar questions to each candidate based on job requirements. Behavioural interviews are one type of structured interview. The questions are designed to elicit a high level of evidence that the candidate has displayed the behaviour associated with competent performance over repeated occasions in the past. Another type of structured interview is Situational interviewing – here the candidate is asked what they would do in certain situations. Situational interviews are generally less valid than Behavioural interviews. The biggest problem with getting HR and Consultants to run structured interviews is the need for training. PsyAsia used to run a 2-day course in behavioural interviewing, but our clients in Asia told us that would require too much time out of the workplace. We thus reduced this to a one-day course (see our behaviour-based interviewing course here if interested) but whilst this satisfies the big decision makers it really only serves as an introduction to interviewing. There needs to be more communication and understanding between HR and those who hold the purse-strings in Asia if we are to increase competence in this area!

Psychometric Tests and Structured Interviews

So thus far, we pointed out that interviews can be reliable and valid but that can only happen if the interviewers have been appropriately trained and where using structured interviews; preferably a behavioural interview. Those using psychometric tools also need to be appropriately trained in order to ensure they remain reliable and valid tools. Assuming training and competence requirements are met for both tests and interviews, why use tests?

Psychometric tests are able to cover a lot more ground in far less time. Aptitude tests give us an indication of numerical, verbal and spatial skills in 18 minutes if using modern tests like the Saville Consulting Aptitude range. There’s no way we could discover this information in even a one-hour interview! Personality assessments can sample and assess personality traits relevant to performance on the job. The average completion time for good personality assessments is 30-40 minutes. There also a few good faster tools available which take around 20 minutes. The amount of information gleaned in this short period of time is a credit to the developers of psychometric tests. However, with particular regard to personality testing, it is necessary to confirm the profile with behavioural evidence from the candidate. So, whilst the profile may suggest somebody who really enjoys multi-tasking, this becomes a basis for an interview question (assuming this is required by the job).

In essence then, psychometric tests are useful because they provide so much more information than an interview can provide in a much shorter period of time. They have been designed by experts using modern statistical techniques aligned with modern personality research and theory. However, psychometric tests are only part of the story and a well designed interview using competent interviewers will add incremental validity to the assessment process. The interview will serve to confirm (or refute) the psychometric profile and provide rich behavioural evidence (that cannot be recorded by psychometric tests) that the person can perform at the level required by the person specification.

Other Methods of Assessment

So far we’ve only looked at different types of interview as an alternative or as complimentary to the assessment process. How about other methods of assessment?

Application forms
We all need to complete one of these to show our intention to apply for a job. Realistically though they are there for this reason alone. They serve as a record of information which the organisation deems important to hold on the individual. Current application forms hold no value as selection tools with the exception perhaps of educational and experiential background. This can be changed by designing application forms that elicit only job relevant responses and preparing a scoring system for the from even before sending it out.

CV/Resume
Candidates like to send their CV/Resume because many people have these on file and it’s easy to quickly update it and print it off on a per-job basis. However, again these are not particularly useful in selection. Research shows that decision-makers are often seduced by smart graphics as well as vocab which sells the applicant by over-inflating their achievements. It’s also possible to lie in a CV, although research has shown that most people don’t lie about their educational qualifications or experience as they know the prospective employer can check up on this. What they do tend to lie about or at least mislead about is their level of competence. We suggest that CVs are not used at any stage of the selection process.

Assessment Centres (ACs)
This is where the candidate is invited to a physical location to partake in a number of exercises with other candidates. Most ACs last a day and during that time the candidates will undergo both group and individual exercises such as presentation exercises, negotiation exercises or in-tray exercises. Assessment Centres have been shown to be highly valid and reliable methods of selection when using well trained assessors.
PsyAsia runs training in Assessment Centres and we also offer consultancy in Assessment Centre Design

References
References lack validity in the assessment process and yet organisations continue to request them! Typically a candidate will not give a potential employer the name of somebody who will give them a poor or perhaps even an honest reference. The tendency is to only offer names of those who they trust will give a great reference. On the other hand, if the current employer really wants the candidate to move on they may fake the reference, making the candidate appear almost angelic! Does this mean we should not use references in the selection process? No. It is possible to improve upon the use of references by designing work-related reference forms that elicit behavioural evidence from the previous employer that is in line with the competency requirements of the new job. However, this may lower the response rate as the referee really needs to think about actual behaviours and write them down rather than sending the standard “he’s a great guy” reference.

Graphology
Most organisations aren’t into this, but an alarmingly high percentage of French organisations are! The idea here is that various personality traits can be seen via somebody’s handwriting. Those traits can then be linked to performance at work. So for somebody that writes with very bold strokes, the graphologist may say they are ambitious. This would be good for a salesperson. However, research has shown a lack of reliability in this method. Not only do people write differently depending on their mood, their culture, their upbringing and so on, but graphologists given the same handwriting to analyse often do not agree with each other about the personality traits of the writer! Graphology thus should not be used as a selection tool.

Phrenology
Phrenologists assume that different aspects of personality are stored in different parts of the brain and that where somebody has more of a particular characteristic, the corresponding part of the brain will be larger and hence cause protrusions on the head! The idea would be that you measure different bumps and indentations on your candidates and then project their personality from that. Of course, this method holds no validity and brain imaging tools such as fMRI and PET scans have refuted it.

Astrology
In Asia, people use astrology to help them decide auspicious dates for business openings, functions, weddings and so on. Does it work for job applicants? No! The idea that people born at the same time, in the same place, where the alignment of stars and planets are similar will work in the same way does not hold any weight. Don’t hire employees based on their star signs!

Psychometric Tests and other Selection Methods

As you can see, there are many ways we can assess people. However each method varies in terms of reliability and validity. Assessment Centres hold very high reliability and validity if done properly, but they are expensive, require lots of resources and skills to run and only assess 6-12 people at a time. We’ve already said that structured interviews are good but again, they take time and resources. Psychometric tools do cost money. However the cost is offset by the number of candidates that can be assessed and the information that can be gathered in the assessment compared to other selection methods. Don’t forget, an interviewer’s time is costly. A panel interview with 3 interviewers is likely to cost around 2-3 times the fee of a psychometric test and yet will not gather as much information. Not to mention the fact that if you are using the right psychometric tool, it’s reliability and validity will already have been assessed and will be good. Whereas we tend to assume that interviews will be reliable and valid if run by trained people – this is rarely tested!

Psychometric Tests for development, coaching, careers advice and team-building

This lesson has focussed on the use of psychometric tests in candidate selection. However, much of what has been raised applies to the use of tests in other scenarios. For example, in careers advice, psychometric tools allow the counsellor to offer advice which is based on a systematic assessment of the individual’s aptitude and personality alongside the information already on file such as achievements thus far, previous experience, educational qualifications and so forth. In coaching, development and team-building, psychometric tools often serve as a reliable and valid basis for the discussion. Not using these tools means the initiator starts off with far less information and is likely to be less systematic. Psychometrics enables the initiator to work from a validated model and a holistic assessment of the people being developed and not to base interventions and advice on subjective insights.

Interested in learning more about psychometric testing for HRM? Keep reading – your next free session is not far away! To ensure you don’t miss a single instalment, we suggest you follow-us on twitter as each new post will be announced there. You may also like to join our face-to-face psychometric training courses in Singapore or Hong Kong – these range from simple introductory courses through to Certification Courses such as the BPS Level A and BPS Level B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Not in Singapore or Hong Kong? No problem – we also offer both recorded and live online training in psychometrics! For full details please see here or email us.

DO NOT COPY OR SAVE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR COMPUTER.
THIS ARTICLE IS CLEARED FOR PUBLISHING ON PSYCHOLOGY1 GROUP SITES ONLY. IT REMAINS COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF PSYASIA INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO PUBLISH IT ON ANY OTHER SITE. YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO COPY/PASTE THIS ARTICLE OR TO SAVE IT TO YOUR LOCAL DRIVE. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED TO READ IT ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE. VIOLATION OF THESE TERMS WILL RESULT IN BANNING OF OFFENDING IPS AND LEGAL ACTION FOR THOSE WHO REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE WITH OR WITHOUT A REFERENCE TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR.

Tags: bps level a & b training, online psychometric course, online psychometric test training, psychometric test singapore, psychometric testing hong kong, psychometric training
Posted in British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing, Free Online Psychometric Training Courses, Free Psychometric Testing Mini-Course, Free Webinars & Online Learning, Personality Tests, Psychometric Test Training and Accreditation, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection | No Comments »

Online Psychometric Testing Mini-Course: Session 2

Thursday, June 24th, 2010

In this session we will explore the following:

1. The different categories of psychometric tests

Different categories of psychometric tests

There are two major categories of psychometric tests:

Tests of MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE

and

Tests of TYPICAL BEHAVIOUR

Maximum Performance Tests

Tests of Maximum performance include tests that have right and wrong answers. This means aptitude tests, ability tests and attainment tests. It’s possible to break down the category of maximum performance tests further by distinguishing between Speed Tests and Power Tests. A speed test is more common in occupational testing. It is a test that has a time limit. The idea is that most candidates will not complete all questions by the end of the allotted time. Candidates will trade off speed with accuracy. It is quite conceivable however that candidates would do somewhat better if they were allowed more time. On the contrary, power tests are not timed. The idea here is that you either know the subject matter or you don’t and that even if you were given more time your score would be unlikely to improve. As an example, I know nothing about quantum physics. If you sit me in a room and ask me to sit a test on this topic I won’t do well – I’ll do badly and I’ll do badly irrespective of how long you give me to complete the test!

So, what is the difference between the main types of maximum performance tests?

Aptitude Tests
These assessments are future looking. They ask if the candidate has the aptitude to do something in the future, perhaps after a period of education or experience. If I want to know if my graduate respondent will make a good leader I may ask him to sit a number of aptitude tests. I am quite certain that the recent graduate will not be able to be a leader right now. But that is not what I am asking. I need to know if after a few years of on-the-job experience and leadership development training this person has the aptitude to be a successful leader. An example of an aptitude test would be Saville Consulting’s Swift Analysis Aptitude Test or their Customer Aptitudes Test.

Ability Tests
In the aptitude example above I noted that I know my recent graduate will not make a good leader now. Ability tests are about the “here and now”. They tell us what the candidate is able to do now. Ability tests appear at the top of the hierarchy in maximum performance assessment. An example of an ability test would be the General Ability Test (GAT) or the Graduate and Managerial Assessment (GMAT).

Attainment Tests
These are the tests that you are probably more familiar with. The tests we sit during our schooling and university years are attainment tests. The question is: following this period of learning, how much does the person now know? So, GCSE tests, A’Levels, University Degrees, Pilot Licence Tests, Piano Tests and so on are all examples of attainment tests.

However, just as you are beginning to think this isn’t too difficult to understand, let me add a thought for you! It is possible for a single test to actually be any of the above 3 categories depending on how you intend to use it! For example, if you have just completed a training course for apprentice mechanics and then give them a mechanical aptitude test in order to assess their learning, you are actually using it in a similar way to an attainment test. If you didn’t train these apprentices and you wish to see if they have the aptitude to be good mechanics and you have them sit this test, you are using it as an aptitude test. If you are about to select a mechanic who needs to perform right now without further training you could use this same test as an ability test!

Typical Behaviour Tests

These are not really tests in the purest sense because with typical behaviour (also called typical performance) there is no right or wrong. In view of this we try to speak about questionnaires and assessments for this category instead of tests! This category includes personality assessments and interest questionnaires.

Personality Assessments
These obviously assess personality. Some personality assessments assess a few types of personality and these are called PERSONALITY TYPE assessments (for example, the Myers Briggs Type Indicator – MBTI or the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire – EPQ). Other personality assessments assess traits. A type is a collection of traits. A trait is a relatively enduring characteristic of the person (such as extraversion or resilience) which can be used to predict behaviours. Trait tools are able to assess at a finer level and this is one reason why type tools should not be used in assessment for selection decisions despite being useful guides in development and team-building. Trait tools can be further split into 2 more categories – NARROWBAND and BROADBAND. Broadband Personality Questionnaires assess traits broadly – this means there are overall fewer traits to assess – perhaps 5 or 6 in total. An example of a broadband personality tool is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). Narrowband tools assess more traits/contain more scales. They typically assess each scale with fewer questions than broadband instruments. Some narrowband assessments may have around 16 scales (e.g., the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire – 16PF) whilst others may have around double that, for example the Identity Personality Questionnaire and the Apollo Profile assess 36 and 34 scales respectively. A benefit of narrowband tools is their ability to assess at a very specific level within the person. This enables a more valid prediction of workplace performance. However, broadband personality tools have their own advantage which is that because they contain more questions per scale/trait – reliability for each scale/trait is generally higher than with narrowband tools. We’ll discuss reliability and validity in detail later in the course.

Note: Some personality assessments were not developed specifically for workplace assessment but are nonetheless used in workplace selection and development (e.g., 16PF, MMPI) whilst other questionnaires were developed specifically to be used in workplace selection and development (e.g., Apollo, OPQ32, Hogan Personality Inventory)

Interest Questionnaires
As the name implies, these tools assess the respondent’s interest in various aspects of the working world in a structured and meaningful way and are therefore typically used in career counselling. They are also used in selection assessment to ascertain whether the candidate will comfortably fit the particular organisation they are applying to work in. For example, if I am interested in doing structured work in a well structured organisation I may not be very happy working for an organisation which values spontaneity and creativity. Some personality assessments also report on the respondent’s interest by way of “derived scales”. Derived scales come about by way of predicting statistically what the respondent would score in particular areas (such as interest) based on how they responded to the general personality assessment. An example of an Interest Questionnaire is the Strong Interest Inventory. An example of a personality questionnaire that uses derived interest scales is the Identity Self-perception Questionnaire.

Tags: online psychometric course, online psychometric test training, psychometric test singapore, psychometric testing hong kong, psychometric training
Posted in British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing, Free Online Psychometric Training Courses, Free Psychometric Testing Mini-Course, Free Webinars & Online Learning, Personality Tests, Psychometric Test Training and Accreditation, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection | No Comments »

Chinese Personality at Work – How Chinese are the Chinese?

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010

FREE HRM WEBINAR

PsyAsia International is pleased to announce the next webinar in our series of professional HR webinars. This time we will be discussing the topic of Chinese Personality and performance at work.

Some HR people in Asia believe that culture plays such a significant role in personality that indigenous personality attributes need to be assessed at recruitment/selection. To this end, personality tests have been developed “in Chinese for the Chinese by the Chinese”. A significant question to ask is: Do these tests add any prediction over and above that afforded by mainstream personality tests developed by world renowned experts in the field?

The above questions will be answered through discussion of the trait model of personality and its biological basis. Peer-reviewed and published research conducted by PsyAsia International’s award-winning Psychologist, Dr. Graham Tyler; award-winning Dr. Peter Newcombe of the University of Queensland; and world-renowned Professor Paul Barrett, formerly of the University of Auckland will be presented in an easy to understand format.

Click to register…

Tags: HRM, hrm webinars, human resource management, human resources, Performance at Work, Personality Assessment, personality test hong kong, personality test singapore, psychometric training hong kong, psychometric training singapore, Recruitment, validity of psychometrics
Posted in Free Webinars & Online Learning, HRM, Performance at Work, Personality Tests, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection | No Comments »

BPS Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing – training in Singapore

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

BPS Certificates of Competence in
Occupational Testing – Level A and B

We are pleased to advise that the next run of training for PsyAsia International’s Psychometric Assessment at Work course which leads to fulfilment of the requirements of the British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing – Level A and B will be in Singapore on the following dates:

Level A: 9-11 June

Level B: 14-16 June

PsyAsia International’s course is run by our director, award-winning registered Psychologist, Dr. Graham Tyler. PsyAsia is the only provider of this course in Asia using resident facilitators. There are no exams with the PsyAsia course either, unlike some overseas providers! In addition, PsyAsia provides all delegates with access to the online learning centre to allow them to learn through recorded learning, interactive forums and even live sessions with the facilitator before the course even begins. Our training is well respected in Singapore and throughout the region as attested by the many positive reviews through the years published at the course webpage. Given that our March Level B course was fully booked 3 weeks before it went ahead, please do register early!

MORE INFORMATION HERE

British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing in Singapore

Tags: BPS Level A, BPS Level B, British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing, psychmetric training, psychological testing certification, psychometric tests in asia, psychometric tests in singapore, Psychometric training courses
Posted in British Psychological Society Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing, HRM, Psychometric Test Training and Accreditation, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection | No Comments »

Saville Wave Psychometric Personality Test – Discounts on Training in Asia

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010

Saville Consulting Wave® – Highest Validity per 15 minutes of test-time!

Wave is available online and in hard-copy

Wave - The Most Predictive Personality Assessment The Saville Consulting Wave was developed by the originator of the OPQ and co-founder of SHL, Professor Peter Saville as an alternative to the static assessments available in the market. Wave assesses candidate’s motives and talents within a validation-centric framework. It was validated within 100 separate businesses.

The tool uses both normative and dynamic ipsative questions and has been shown to have greater validity in predicting performance and leadership than any tool it has been compared to in research. Furthermore, the shorter version of Wave, the Focus Questionnaire has more validity per 15 minutes of test-taking time than any comparison questionnaire.

Profile jobs, run 360 performance appraisal, assess personality type for team-building, assess entrepreneurial potential and provide extensive development advice all within one framework

The performance culture framework which underlies the Saville Consulting Wave allows the tool to be used extensively for different HR applications from recruitment/selection through to performance appraisal and development.
Follow the links below for further details:


Wave Professional Styles	Performance Card Set

Wave Focus Styles	Wave Performance 360

Wave Types	Wave Development

Wave Entrepreneurial	Wave Culture

Wave Job Profiler

View some sample reports from Wave here

Become accredited to use the Wave
with a 25% early-bird discount

Take action now! Your competitors may already be trained to use this century’s revolution in personality assessment. We’ve trained people from the big consulting firms to small local careers advisors to recruitment consultants, government ministries and universities. We want to provide you with an incentive to join the increasing number of professionals who value high validity in selection and support from local psychologists in Asia. PsyAsia International, Asia’s leader in psychometric training, runs the Wave training in Singapore and Hong Kong. We’re offering a 25% early-bird discount for our next courses in those locations:

Wave Conversion Course: 1 Day – View course details

For those with BPS Level B or those who are qualified to use
a substantive personality assessment such as OPQ but not including tests such
as MBTI/DISC/HARRISON etc.

SINGAPORE: 17 June (SG$1200 / SG$900)

HONG KONG: 6 July (HK$6000 / HK$4500)

Wave Module Course: 2 Days – View course details

For those without a qualification in a substantive personality
assessment.

SINGAPORE: 17-18 June (SG$2050 / SG$1538)

HONG KONG: 6-7 July (HK$9888 / HK$7416)

For the early-bird offer (25% discount), please register at http://www.psyasia.com/register
and quote WAVESEB for Singapore courses and WAVEHEB
for Hong Kong Courses. Deadline is 15 May for Singapore and 31 May for Hong
Kong.

Note – delegates on our BPS Level B course in
Singapore always get 50% discount off the Wave Conversion
course which follows their Level B training. More details at http://www.psyasia.com/bpscourses

Course Reviews from Previous Attendees

“Informative, relevant to work, knowledgeable facilitator”

Danny
Hay Group

“Good introduction to the tool and practical session was useful”

Geraldyn Fong
Managing Consultant (Psychologist)

Hudson Global Resources, Singapore

“Insightful and informative. The methodology behind the Saville
Consulting Wave Report is light years ahead of other psychometric tests yet
it is a breeze to use! The interface between motives, competencies and culture
is exactly the missing link that recruiters are looking for.”

Diana Yeo
Ministry of Defence, Singapore

“A highly practical and enjoyable approach to the application
of an extremely useful tool for selection and development – well worth the investment,
highly recommended.”

Neville Pearsall
Director HR
RMIT International University, Vietnam

Not ready for training and accreditation
but still want to use the Wave?

Then please consider PsyAsia’s Psychologist-on-Call™
service instead. Our registered psychologists will take care of the complete process for you, including a call and behavioural interview for your candidates and a feedback session with the decision-maker. More details at http://www.psyasia.com/psychologist_candidate_screening.php.

Tags: 360 appraisal, 360 performance appraisal, HRM, human resource management, Leadership, online psychometric testing, Performance Appraisal, Personality Assessment, personality test singapore, Personality Tests, psychometric test, psychometric test training, psychometric training singapore, Saville Consulting Wave, saville consulting wave singapore, Saville Wave Training, saville wave training hong kong, saville wave training singapore
Posted in 360 appraisal, HRM, Job Analysis, Leadership, Performance Appraisal, Personality Tests, Psychometric Test Training and Accreditation, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection, Saville Consulting Wave, Saville Wave Training | No Comments »

The Amazing Apollo Profile

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010

The Amazing Apollo Profile

This free webinar will be facilitated by Mr. Jim Bowden, the developer of the Apollo Profile. The session will be interactive (provided attendees kit themselves out with headphones and a mic!) and Jim will present numerous interesting case studies.

The webinar will cover the following:

• Introduction: The Amazing Apollo Profile- can transform Recruitment, Staff Development, and Organisation Performance –Client example
• Apollo Questionnaire – valid/reliable/comprehensive
• Why is Apollo amazing? Apollo Advantages
• Using and interpreting of Apollo reports with anecdotes
• Recruitment – Accurate, easy, low cost – Case Study using Apollo Best Match in China for filtering 12,000 applicants for 40 Graduate level jobs
• Training and Development – Unique Apollo report PLUS downloadable solutions. Convenient, low cost, motivating
• Organisation Development. Benchmarking: Can analyse and identify current corporate strengths and weaknesses – then create high performing models/culture, identify engagement issues – case studies
• Customising: Develop models that work specifically for your organisation. If your organisation is serious about leadership through people.
• Integrate everything together with flexible multi-purpose Internet Online solutions. Use your own competencies frameworks and vocabulary – examples
• Special Offer – have to listen to Webinar to find out!

Date: Monday, May 17, 2010

Time: 12:30 PM – 1:30 PM SGT

After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar.

System Requirements

PC-based attendees
Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP, 2003 Server or 2000

Macintosh®-based attendees
Required: Mac OS® X 10.4.11 (Tiger®) or newer

Space is limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now at:
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/522465752

Tags: Apollo Profile, Apollo Profile Hong Kong, Apollo Profile Malaysia, Apollo Profile Singapore, HRM, human resource management, human resources, Personality Assessment, personality test singapore, Personality Tests, psychometric test, psychometric training singapore, reliability of psychometrics
Posted in Free Webinars & Online Learning, HRM, Personality Tests, Psychometric Test Purchase FAQs, Psychometric Test Training and Accreditation, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection, Talent Management | No Comments »

Singapore Human Resource Congress sponsored by PsyAsia International

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

PsyAsia International is pleased to once again be supporting Singapore’s Human Resource professionals as a sponsor of the Singapore Human Resources Institute’s Annual Human Resource Congress.

The Singapore HR Congress and Business-Connect Exposition 2010 will address the newly derived term of HR TransmutationTM and explore the topic in deeper context. The current economic churning has made it explicitly clear that industry is not just facing another downturn but it is accompanied by impactful structural, demographic and mindset changes across industry and top management cannot afford to respond with anything less than a complete overhaul of the system to survive and sustain. Renowned speakers and leaders from the HR fraternity will share their experiences and provide useful insights on the know-how of managing paradoxes in a turbulent world.

PsyAsia’s clients are entitled to a 35% discount on the price of conference tickets. Please contact us in the first instance to avail of this special offer.
“A strong and capable HR community can be the catalyst and change agents to initiate and implement people development efforts in organisations, and help build stronger capabilities amongst our business leaders and managers.”

PM Lee Hsien Loong
11th World HR Congress 2006 organised by SHRI

PsyAsia International is Asia’s leading independent distributor of Psychometric Tests of Personality and Aptitude. From offices across Asia, including Singapore and Hong Kong, our psychologists assist the world’s top organisations and local governments to recruit, select, assess and retain the best employees. Our services are only offered by fully registered organisational psychologists with years of experience in their field. PsyAsia also offers world-class training in Psychometric Testing in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Online.

Tags: hr, hr conference singapore, HRM, hrm singapore, human resource management, human resources, Performance at Work, Personality Test, psychometric test, psychometric training singapore, Recruitment, Selection, Talent Management
Posted in HRM, Human Resources Articles (General), Personality Tests, Psychometric Testing, Recruitment & Selection, Talent Management | No Comments »

Assessment Centre & Development Centre Training in Singapore

Tuesday, March 9th, 2010

Archive for the ‘ Recruitment & Selection ’ Category

Psychometric Testing in Singapore, Hong Kong and across Asia

Chinese Personality Testing – Can Indigenous Tests Predict Work Performance?