Testing, testing.... do you hear me?
Psychometric tests.
These words invoke feelings of anxiety and fear for many people, and feelings of curiosity, or perhaps confusion, in others. Having spent six years working as an assessment consultant, and many of these years training people in how to use psychometric assessments well, I know a lot about these tests (although not nearly as much as those who design them for a living).
There are many great things about psychometric tests, and when used well, they can help people to gain significantly better insights about individuals for a range of purposes, and help organisations to make more informed decisions that lead to better performance outcomes. I personally have used them for a broad range of purposes, and would never hire a member of my own team without undertaking psychometrics first.
However, because psychometrics are quite scary for many, and because of the complexity inherent in building, designing and using such tests, most people have very limited knowledge of how psychometrics work. This limited knowledge can result in people and organisations using bad tools, or using good tools poorly. Often the result is organisations pouring a lot of money and time into tools that tell them very little, candidates and employees being subjected to unnecessary assessments, or at its worst, harm being done to individuals.
I have come across many people who have had really bad experiences with such tools. I’ll be honest, one of the reasons I am passionate about people using psychometrics well is that before I worked in the psychometric industry, I was a candidate who had a very bad experience, so I know exactly the negative impact poor use of psychometrics can have.
As an Organisational Psychologist with a relatively in-depth understanding of psychometric tests, I personally think I have an obligation to ensure these tests, when used, are used well, and that potential harm is minimised. A recent debate in a forum on I/O Psychology sparked my thinking about how to do this. Which is why I am writing this blog.
Psychologists are not in agreement on this point - some feel we should be the only ones allowed to use any form of psychometrics in order to avoid the less educated using them badly. Others feel we should be very vocal when we see bad tools being used, or good tools being used badly. Others feel we should just provide as much education as possible, and let people get on with it - if an organisation is getting value from a tool, does it really matter if that tool isn’t all that robust?
Personally, I think the following are important guidelines to follow when it comes to using psychometrics:
If you are considering using psychometrics for any purpose, be informed. These tools are complex, and there is huge variation in their quality. There is a wealth of information out there about how to use tests well, which tests to use, and so on - so take the time to educate yourself. A good place to start is the British Psychological Society who offer reviews of tests and a pathway to become an accredited test user (https://ptc.bps.org.uk/information-and-resources/information-testing) .
When considering which psychometrics to use, make sure you use those based on well validated models of whatever it is you are trying to measure - personality, cognitive ability, or employee motivation. For example, the Big Five model of personality is the best out there - so good tools typically use this.
Only use tools for the purposes in which they were intended. Do NOT use a tool designed for leadership development for employee selection.
Hold yourself, your organisation and anyone using psychometrics to the highest standards when it comes to test use. Follow test publisher guidelines to the letter, and adhere to strict processes when it comes to test administration, interpretation, and storage. Respecting individuals’ privacy when it comes to test results is an absolute bottom line for good test use.
When it comes to employee selection, it is vital only robust tools are used, and used well. This means the tools need to be valid and reliable, used by people who are trained in them, and used as only one part of the selection process. The risks of getting employee selection wrong are too great for both candidates and organisations to use poorly designed tools or poorly designed selection processes. So, if you work in recruitment, make sure you are informed about which tests your organisation is using, and seek advice on how to use them well. Ask your test providers for information on the tools’ validity and reliability - and if they can’t give it to you, don’t use their tests.
When it comes to restructuring, be extremely cautious about using psychometrics. Think first about the data you have on employees’ job performance, as past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour. Think about job samples and other ways of directly measuring employees’ performance in ways that closely replicate the conditions they will face in the workplace. And if you choose to use psychometrics for this purpose, ensure they are of the highest standards when it comes to reliability and validity, and that they are only one piece of the puzzle - there should be multiple data points informing your decision making.
When it comes to team building, there is an absolute wealth of tools out there, and many of them, while popular, really tell you very little about human behaviour. For example, Psychologists have been wringing their hands for decades about the popularity of the Myers-Briggs assessment, which in reality is not a good predictor of how people behave at work. But, over the years I have had to come to terms with the fact that, organisations and individuals generally love this tool regardless. And if it sparks a useful conversation about individual difference and work preferences, and if it is used by well trained people as part of a broader process that the organistion finds useful, I am okay with that. But please, ensure people don’t go back to work and start using their Myers-Brigg type as an excuse for why they can’t do certain things, or why they behave poorly.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. There is so much I could write about this topic, and so much that has already been written. It’s a subject that causes much debate in my field, and will continue to for years to come. So I will likely write more in future - but for now I will stop there - feel free to reach out and ask me questions if you would like to know more!