Psychometric Test for Recruitment

The term “psycho” derives from the Greek meaning “mind” and the term “metric” means to measure.  Thus, “Psychometric”, in broad terms, means to measure a quality of the mind.  In modern psychology that now means measuring a myriad of psychological constructs, ranging from clinical measures of anxiety and depression, to assessing behavioural problems, to measuring intelligence, skills or personality traits for organisational psychology.

Psychometric testing is a large field within the broader profession of psychology and is used in clinical, education, research and organisational settings.  There are literally hundreds of good quality psychometric tests used across these professional areas.

A good quality psychometric test must meet two standards – reliability and validity. Reliability means a test will give very similar results for the same candidate each time they complete it.  For example, if a candidate scored in the average range for an intelligence test and then completed a different version of the same test, then they should again score in the average range.  A good test must be reliable and if it isn’t then there is no point using it because it yields unreliable data.

Validity refers to a test measuring what it purports to measure. For example, a measure of general intelligence should measure that and not some other quality, such as processing speed or selective attention. Another form of validity is “predictive validity”. This tells you how well a certain measure can predict future behaviour.

The best example of predictive validity in organisational psychology is a test of general intelligence. Decades of research have repeatedly shown that general intelligence is the single most effective predictor of individual performance at work. Of course there are many kinds of talent, many kinds of mental ability and many other aspects of personality and character that influences a person’s chances of success and happiness. But there is ample evidence that general intelligence is the single most valid predictor of productive work behaviours and training performance.

YES, psychometric testing can significantly improve recruitment decisions when used effectively. Here's how:

Objective Data: Psychometric tests provide objective data about candidates' cognitive abilities, personality traits, and skills. This data helps hiring managers make more informed decisions based on scientific assessments rather than gut feelings.

Predictive Accuracy: Research has shown that well-validated psychometric tests can predict job performance and success better than traditional interviews or resume screening alone. This predictive accuracy leads to better hiring choices.

Reduced Bias: Psychometric tests can help reduce bias in the hiring process. They focus on objective criteria, which can mitigate unconscious biases that often affect decision-making during interviews. Psychometric tests also give employers a standardised and equitable way to compare candidates for a role and in turn, candidates can be reassured that the recruitment process is fair, and they are being treated like all other candidates.

Match-to-Job Requirements: By using psychometric tests tailored to specific job requirements, you can ensure that candidates have the necessary cognitive abilities and personality traits for success in the role.

Time Efficiency: Psychometric tests can efficiently screen a large pool of candidates, saving time and resources in the recruitment process. This allows hiring managers to focus their efforts on the most promising candidates.

Candidate Fit: Assessments can help identify candidates who not only have the skills for the job but also align with the company's culture and values, contributing to better long-term retention and job satisfaction.

Legal Defensibility: When implemented correctly, using psychometric tests can enhance the legal defensibility of your hiring decisions by demonstrating a standardized and objective process.

It's important to note that psychometric testing should be part of a comprehensive recruitment strategy that also includes interviews and reference checks. When used as part of a well-rounded approach, psychometric testing can indeed improve the quality of recruitment decisions.

Fermion has access to several test suppliers, however, the company we most commonly use is called “Criteria”. They offer a wide range of recruitment related psychometric tests that cover general intelligence, emotional intelligence, and personality. There are also a range of skills tests, such as the Office 365 suite, administrative skills, and workplace risk & safety assessments. 

The main battery of tests we recommend for most roles is one that covers IQ, EQ and personality and these tests are called, respectively, Criteria Cognitive Aptitude Test (CCAT), Emotify and the Employee Personality Profile (EPP). This battery of tests takes approximately 45 minutes to complete. 

CCAT: Measures a candidate’s general mental ability, or general intelligence, and covers problem-solving, logical thinking and verbal reasoning. The test consists of 50 multiple-choice questions that start easy and get progressively more difficult. The candidate answers as many questions are they can in 15 minutes. 

Emotify:  An ability-based measure of emotional intelligence that assesses a candidate’s ability to accurately perceive, understand, and manage emotions. It features three engaging and interactive assessments which together take 20 minutes to complete.

EPP: Measures 12 work related personality traits from 140 questions that are answered on a 5- point scale. The questionnaire is untimed, but most candidates complete it in 10 minutes. From this a 6-page report is generated that also gives a percentage match to 12 different job categories, such “Management & Leadership” or “Accounting & Finance”. The report also includes 3 validity scales. 

Testing & Feedback: Irrespective of where the testing is used within the selection process, all candidates are spoken to before they receive their test invitation. This is to explain the tests and the process to the candidates and answer any questions they may have. Candidates are usually asked to set their own deadline for test completion. All candidates are asked of they would like to receive their test results, which most do. 

Test interpretation and feedback is given in the context of the candidate’s CV and the job description. The feedback is given in written form and followed up with verbal feedback if needed or requested. 

Cost (excl. GST): $350 per candidate.

General intelligence is the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly, and learn from experience. It is not our amount of knowledge but our ability to pick up and apply that knowledge. Intelligence is the ability to “catch on” and “make sense of things.” 

85 years of research has shown that general intelligence is the most valid predictor of future performance and learning when hiring people and is the single most effective predictor known of individual performance on the job. Of course there are many kinds of talent, many kinds of mental ability and many other aspects of personality and character that influences a person’s chances of success and happiness but there is ample evidence that general intelligence is the single most valid predictor of productive work behaviours and training performance.

Intelligence can also be thought of as the ability to deal with cognitive complexity and the rate at which we learn new information. More complex tasks require more mental manipulation, and this manipulation of information – discerning similarities and inconsistencies, drawing inferences, grasping new concepts and so on – constitutes intelligence in action.    

In more complex jobs it does so better than any other single personal trait, including education and job experience.  The importance of general intelligence in job performance is related to complexity.  Occupations differ considerably in the complexity of their demands, and as that complexity rises, higher general intelligence levels become a bigger asset and lower levels a bigger handicap.  

The average IQ score is 100, and for those statistically minded people, it has a standard deviation of 15.  IQ is measured on a spectrum from extremely low to very high or genius level. As with all measurement there is error, so a more accurate way of describing people without using such a precise number is within a range, for example, average range, or high average range.  

IQ is stable and it is not difficult to measure and in the entire selection process, is often the most objective piece of data you will get on a candidate. There are lots of different tests of general mental ability available and are preferred one is the Criteria Cognitive Aptitude Test (CCAT). This test has 50 multiple-choice questions, and the candidate must complete as many as they can in 15 minutes. There are other excellent test of general mental ability, and we would strongly recommend one of them be used in all recruitment, preferably as a screening tool. 

Yes. Testing for emotional intelligence (EQ) is important as it helps assess candidates' ability to control their own emotions and their ability to empathetically interact with others.

Emotional intelligence refers to a person’s ability to recognise emotions in others and themselves, understand how their, and others, behaviour affect people emotionally and the ability to manage their own emotions effectively. EQ can play a significant role in job performance as it impacts how individuals handle interpersonal relationships, cope with stress, and navigate workplace dynamics.

Over the previous two decades, EQ has attracted much attention in both popular and academic literature. Two distinct conceptualisations of EQ emerged during this time that attempt to broadly define EQ and guide its measurement - an ability-based model and trait-based model. The ability-based approach views EQ as a type of intelligence, akin to cognitive ability, and utilises performance-based assessment. The trait model views EQ more like personality and assesses it via self-report measures. The ability-based approach is more suited to recruitment contexts than the self-report approach. Extensive research over the past decade has found evidence for ability-based EQ being related to higher job performance across numerous job roles and populations.

We recommend using “Emotify” from Criteria. It is an ability-based measure of emotional intelligence that assesses a candidate’s ability to accurately perceive, understand, and manage emotions. It features three engaging, interactive assessments which together take about 20 minutes to complete. The EQ score is based on the IQ method of reporting scores, i.e., 100 is average, with a standard deviation of 15.

The short answer is, it depends on the role. That said, many roles require both and we recommend you test for both. If the role is intellectually and cogntiviely demanding, then it is irrelevant how high an EQ a candidate has if they have low IQ. Alternatively, some roles require high EQ but average IQ. 

The challenge you have in the selection process is that you cannot know each candidate's EQ or IQ until you measure it. 

In general terms, psychometric testing is about giving you data about each candidate that is not available from other methods or sources. Thus, an excellent battery of tests for your candidates is IQ, EQ and personality, and then you have the data to compliment your interviews and work history data to make informed decisions as to their suitability. 

So its not IQ or EQ, it's both. Both are necessary for job perfomance but not sufficient on their own.  

In general terms, personality is a set or repertoire of behaviours that is usually consistent across time and situations. There is variability but for most day-to-day situations and contexts, excluding highly stressful, novel or significant power differences, our personality is stable and predictable.  It’s not possible to predict specific instances of behaviour but knowing a person’s personality can help predict how they will behave most of the time in normal, physically and psychologically safe, conditions.

What personality profile, amongst the numerous products on the market, is the best or most accurate, particularly in the recruitment and staff selection context? After just a 30-minute survey of the internet and viewing known test provider websites, I was able to identify 36 different personality or behavioural assessments!

With so many profiles available, how can a user of personality profiles decide upon the best and most accurate profile? What does the science and research, not the marketing, say about personality profiles?

The research into personality over the past four decades has overwhelmingly supported a model of personality referred to as the “Five-Factor Model of Personality” or sometimes called the “Big Five”. The field of psychology and the science of personality has consistently supported this model of personality. Indeed, many of the widely used personality profiles (OPQ, HPI & NEO-PI-3) are based on the Five-Factor Model of Personality.  However, the only personality questionnaire and profile that measures the Five-Factor Model is the NEO-PI-3.

Some quotes from scientific journal articles about the Five-Factor Model of Personality are as follows:

Sydney Business School & University of Wollongong reported the following in the International Coaching Psychology Review, September 2012:

“The Big-Five/Five-Factor Model of personality, based on the trait approach, is considered by most authors to be the most investigated and validated model of personality currently available”.

“In the 1980s a consensus began to emerge on a Five-Factor model developed by Costa & McCrae.  Support for the Five-Factor model has been further strengthened by a series of meta-analyses confirming the Big-Five’s predictive validity in terms of behaviours and life outcomes across a wide range of contexts.  The Five-Factor model is now the most widely accepted general model of personality used today”.

“The NEO-PI-R is rapidly becoming one of the most popular measures of normal personality in the research literature.  The psychometric properties, including predictive validity, of this inventory are uniformly favourable as evidenced by empirical reviews”.

An article in the Harvard Business Review, titled, “Most Work Conflicts Aren’t Due to Personality”, 20.5.14:

“If you or others feel you must use personality testing as part of conflict resolution, consider using non-categorical, well-validated personality assessments such as the Hogan Personality Inventory or the NEO Assessment of the “Big Five” Personality dimensions. These tests, which have ample peer-reviewed, and psychometric evidence to support their reliability and validity, better explain variance in behavior than do categorical assessments like the Myers-Briggs, and therefore can better explain why conflicts may have unfolded the way they have. And unlike the Myers-Briggs which provides an “I’m OK, you’re OK”-type report, the Hogan Personality Inventory and the NEO are likely to identify some hard-hitting development themes for almost anyone brave enough to take them, for example telling you that you are set in your ways, likely to anger easily, and take criticism too personally”.

An article in Scientific American titled, “How Accurate Are Personality Tests?”, 11.10.18:

“By contrast, the Big 5 and HEXACO models were shaped by an empirical process and independent peer review that showed people’s scores tended to be consistent, and predictions made using the models are reproducible. Without that, personality tests should be treated with extreme suspicion.”

Therefore, the personality model supported by independent scientific research is the Five-Factor Model of Personality as measured by the NEO-PI-3.  Thus, at Fermion we use the NEO-PI-3, or other profiles that are based on the five-factor model, such as the Employee Personality Profile from Criteria.

It is fundamental that psychometric tests are administered and interpreted correctly. Testing is more than emailing an anonymous link to a candidate and then having the results emailed to the hiring manager.

At Fermion, we have developed a testing methodology that delivers reliable results. From speaking to all candidates before the testing, to the precise nature of the verbal and written instructions, and finally, the context-dependent interpretation of the data with the client.  All these factors ensure the results from the tests and assessments are reliable and valid.

In addition to this, there are measures built into quality psychometric tests and assessments that increase reliability of the results.  These measures include verification testing and validity scales.  Verification testing is used for aptitude and skills testing and is where the candidate is told they may be required to complete a different version of the same test later to confirm their initial results. Validity scales are used for behavioural and personality questionnaires and these cover positive-impression-management or self-enhancing, consistency scales and self-critical scales. These measures, combined with proper verbal and written instructions, ensure the reliability of the data.

There is a cost, but it is a fraction of the cost of hiring the wrong person. For arguments sake, let’s say you hire someone for a $60k position and after three months it is apparent that you made a mistake. That three months cost you $15k in wages, plus the time it took you to recruit and train them, and that isn’t factoring in opportunity costs. 

This simple scenario demonstrates the cost of recruitment errors. It isn’t difficult to imagine a far more costly mis-hire for a senior role or one that took longer to resolve. Even once it is resolved, you are still left with the dilemma of recruiting again and possibly making the same mistake again.  

Psychometric testing can significantly shift the odds in your favour against making a costly hiring mistake.

At Fermion we charge $90 per aptitude or skill test and $170 for a personality profile.  We would recommend a test of general intelligence, emotional intelligence and a personality profile. That would cost $350 (excl. GST) per candidate and is an excellent battery of tests that takes the candidate 45 minutes to complete. 

Using the $60k example above, it would cost $1400 to test four candidates, and you would have prevented a mis-hire and not only saved thousands of dollars, but more importantly, hire a good candidate. In those terms, psychometric testing is true value for money and could potentially save you thousands and thousands of dollars.