Critically Evaluate the Use of Personality Assessment in Work Settings
Critically Evaluate The Use Of Personality Appraisal In Assignment Settings. What Are The Important Able Issues? Abstract Personality tests are acclimated in a assignment setting, predominantly for the purpose of appliance and selection. A cardinal of able issues abide about the use of personality tests in this setting, and practitioners should be bright of the accessible flaws complex in the use of personality tests. The abstract has accent apropos with the appearance of personality tests. Individuals appearance tests can beggarly those who access the accomplished array are the ones who are recruited.
This should be advised breadth personality tests are acclimated for recruiting the top candidates as adjoin to actuality acclimated for removing the atomic acceptable candidates. The authority of personality tests has to be advised aback actuality acclimated for another purpose. A aerial face authority of tests can access the likelihood of appearance tests; yet low face authority can aftereffect in the personality tests actuality alone by candidates. Practitioners accept to additionally booty into annual a cardinal of ethical issues afore appliance personality tests in a assignment setting.
Key Words: Personality testing; Faking; Validity; Recruitment; Ethics. Introduction Personality tests are acclimated in a assignment ambience at the date of recruitment, and additionally already bodies are aural a job, to appraise their alive preferences. Personality ancestry accept been begin to be predictive of a cardinal of outcomes, alignment from bloom behaviours to assignment achievement (Hough & Oswald, 2008). Assignment specific factors accompanying to personality types accommodate Job Performance, Assignment Motivation, Leadership and Adaptability (Morgeson et al. , 2007). Appliance the Big Five personality traits, Judge et al. (2001) begin that Conscientiousness, decidedly predicts job achievement beyond altered organisational settings, and Emotional adherence additionally predicts all-embracing Job Performance. Organisations ambition to recruit the candidates who appearance the greatest anticipation of assuming able-bodied in the role and those who are activity to annual the best from the use of all of the training opportunities provided by the organisation (Shum, O’Gorman & Myors, 2006:147). However, the use of personality assessments can be debated, and a cardinal of factors accept to be advised afore appliance personality tests to accomplish important decisions about individuals’ careers.
The focus of this article is on the use of personality appraisal in organisations, primarily in appliance and selection, and the issues practitioners charge to be acquainted of afore appliance personality assessments. Appearance Appearance of personality tests is been declared by agreement such as “response distortion, consequence management, amusing desirability, announcement absurd virtues, and self-enhancement” (Griffin, Chmielowski & Yoshita, 2007). The abounding definitions may annual for the abundant cardinal of arise accessories apropos to the appearance of personality tests (Morgeson et al. , 2007).
Researchers accept appropriate that it should be accustomed that individuals will accord inaccurate responses in self-report tests due to the amount absorbed to the aftereffect (Hogan, Barrett, & Hogan, 2007). However, there is little accord in the research, about the abundance of faking, or how to abode the issue. As another is generally agitated out in a top-down approach, breadth those who accomplish in the top 5-10% are called to advance (Arthur, Woehr, Graziano, 2001), the achievability of candidates appearance personality tests should be a austere appliance for practitioners, contrarily those who accept falsely represented themselves will be selected.
Where it is accessible what is actuality activated in self-report questionnaires, there is acceptable to be a greater befalling to affected responses. The face authority of questionnaires is an important issue, as it is acceptable to accord to faking. Furnham & Drakeley (2000) begin that managers tend to use personality tests with aerial face validity, due to apropos about accepting to rationalise the use of the analysis to participants. Alternatively, appliance low face authority personality tests could beggarly the participants adios the annual of the test, and do not absolutely appoint with it (Kline, 2000:430).
However, breadth face authority of personality tests is high, the accurateness of personality tests array can be adulterated by individuals who accept they apperceive what the “best response” is, and accord an acute rating. Arthur et al. ,(2001) advance that it is accessible to accept the acute array on a calibration are the best or atomic desired, due to the diction of questions. Ironically, ‘fakers’ may overrate themselves and arise to be inappropriate for a role.
For example, conscientiousness has been begin to be easier to affected than another personality ancestry such as “Openness to Experiences” (Griffin, Hesketh & Grayson, 2004); accordingly alone who amount themselves to be anytime Conscientious may be aseptic by rules and be clashing for the position. Practitioners accept to be acquainted of the limitations of aerial face authority and the likelihood of apish responses (Kline 2000: 255). Much of the analysis about appearance of personality tests has been lab-based, and agitated out on acceptance (Judge et al. 2008), accordingly the catechism as to whether they do bluff in absoluteness needs to be advised (Griffin, Chmielowski & Yoshita, 2007). Hogan et al. ,(2007) looked at responses to personality tests in the appliance action for a chump annual role, and compared responses accustomed at two stages by 5,266 applicants, over a six ages interval. Hogan et al. , appropriate that if individuals do affected personality tests at the appliance stage, they are best acceptable to do so already they accept been alone from the job on a antecedent occasion. The allegation adumbrated little aberration in the personality measures from time one and time two.
These allegation would advance that not all applicants attack to affected in absolute appliance settings. However, allegation by Griffin et al. ,(2007) adumbrated that some participants do affected their personality aback applying to jobs, and this has an appulse on the rank adjustment of scores. A able association of these allegation is that practitioners accept to be alert aback interpreting personality scores, but should not be contemptuous by behindhand personality measures totally. As able-bodied as actuality acquainted of issues about faking, practitioners should be acquainted of the methods acclimated to abate or analyze faking.
A proactive adjustment acclimated included the use of forced-choice, or ipsative inventories, in which neither advantage is added socially adorable than the other. An another advantage is to use advisory warnings adjoin faking. A acknowledging adjustment for “fixing” appearance can be the use of amusing agreeableness scales or a lie calibration aural the annual which announce if a acknowledging is faking. However, there is little affirmation acknowledging the capability of strategies such as advisory warnings and affected best annual architecture (Hogan et al. , 2007), and amusing agreeableness questions are acceptable to be added cellophane in their urpose, and accordingly decumbent actuality to apish (Griffin et al. , 2007). With all of the issues surrounding appearance of personality tests, it has been argued that instead of appliance the tests as a adjustment of recruiting the “best” performers on the test, there is absolutely a greater annual in appliance the measures as a anatomy of abnegation the atomic performers aback appliance tests to “select out” (Mueller- Hanson, Heggestad & Thornton, 2003). Appliance personality tests for selecting out applicants would acquiesce those who accept performed poorly, and those who accept apish but not been acknowledged in accepting the archetype score, to be rejected.
Validity In the accomplished decade there has been ample affirmation in the bookish abstract for the abutment of personality tests for selection, but a there accept been apropos about the predicative authority of personality tests apropos to assignment accompanying behaviour (Meyer et al. , 2001). However, practitioners connected to use personality measures for another purpose (Bartram, 2004), behindhand the bookish arguments. Critics generally highlight the “low” authority array of the best augur in the Big Five with Job Performance, Conscientiousness (r=0. 23; Judge et al. 2008), breadth as another methods of assessment, such as the use of General Mental Adeptness tests which accept been begin to accept a predictive authority of r=0. 51 (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). However, the authority annual of Conscientiousness should not be dismissed. Meyer et al. , (2001) articular a ample cardinal of medical and cerebral interventions, which aftermath correlations of about . 15 to . 30, are frequently accustomed by professionals, such as demography approved aspirin to abate accident of affection attacks. It can be argued that academics are absolutely focussing on a “gold standard” annual of authority (Judge et al. 2008), and not attractive at the allowances of another interventions that accept agnate predictive validities. Schmidt & Hunter (1998) advance that appliance a aggregate of measures with almost low authority on their own, aback accumulated would be added than acceptable for use in recruiting, for archetype accumulation a conscientiousness tests, assignment sample tests and a job adeptness tests. Practitioners should accept a bright compassionate of the archetype authority of personality measures in accord to job performance, and be acquainted of ample amount of arcane about-face that can occur.
There is no agreement that an alone who array awful on a personality admeasurement will be acknowledged in their role, and an individual’s abilities and adeptness are acceptable to annual for a ample allotment of their achievement in the role (Shum et al. ,2006:161). Ethics It is important that ethical issues are taken into appliance aback appliance personality measures in a assignment setting. First of all, organisations accept to be acquainted of the abilities appropriate by the alone administering the personality tests and interpreting them.
In the UK, the British Cerebral Society sets a requisite accepted through the accomplishment of Level A & Level B abilities in adjustment to administrate and adapt both adeptness and personality tests. However, not all individuals who administrate tests are amenable for interpreting the data, accordingly the those who are administering the analysis should access the Occupational Analysis Administration accomplishment (British Cerebral Society, 2000). Insufficient training on the use of a personality admeasurement can aftereffect in baloney of the after-effects and cede the analysis useless.
Where individuals accept not been provided with acceptable training to administrate tests, there is the achievability of accouterment inconsistent instructions to participants, and arch to errors or biases in the after-effects (Kline, 2000:9). An affair that ties in with the Level B training is that practitioners are accomplished to use one specific test, accordingly they may alone anytime use this one test, and not booty into appliance the annual of the analysis they are appliance for the specific needs of the organisation. Organisations charge to be acquainted of the issues about the acknowledgment they accommodate to individuals who booty allotment in personality measures.
How acknowledgment is interpreted by individuals should be considered, and whether they will accept the acceptation of the array (Kline, 2000:431). Breadth a applicant completes a personality test, but does not annual at the top of the group, they may feel they are not acceptable for the organisation, or the blazon of role they are applying for. The implications of what is appear aback to the candidates can aftereffect in an alone authoritative above decisions about the blazon of role they administer for in the future, should they be told that they denticulate decidedly “poorly” in the personality analysis (Toplis, Dulewicz & Fletcher, 2005:37).
Practitioners should acutely explain the acumen for the personality measures used, and ensure the acknowledgment they accommodate will not accept a abrogating appulse on the individual. An important appliance for practitioners should be the accessible biases captivated aural personality tests, which can be biased appear a gender, race, amusing chic or disability. These factors can access the annual of a personality test, and can affectation absolute array (British Cerebral Society, 2000). However, there is affirmation to advance that the use of personality measures balances out the biases of adeptness tests, aback comparing altered ancestral groups.
Therefore the accumulated use of adeptness and personality tests can be benign (Bartram, 2004). Aback testing individuals with disabilities, factors such as the time required, the ambiance actuality activated in, and the adjustment of testing, all accept to be advised to ensure the testing action is fair (Toplis, Dulewicz & Fletcher, 2005:42). Cessation Researchers accept articular bright allowances in appliance personality measures in a assignment accompanying environment, abnormally aback recruiting to a post.
However, the use of personality appraisal should be advised as a added adjustment of another into a role, due to the cardinal of accessible factors that can access the after-effects of a personality test. It is bright that appearance of tests is a able-bodied researched area, however, little accord exists with how to best abode the achievability that individuals will affected a analysis that has a amount absorbed to the aftereffect (Hogan et al. , 2007). One accessible band-aid is to use the tests as a anatomy of selecting out those who are in the everyman percentile (Mueller-Hanson et al. 2003), and appliance added measures to abutment the another of those who accomplish in the high percentile. The apropos about the archetype authority of personality measures and job achievement accept aloft doubts about the adequacy of personality assessments. Aback comparing distinct personality ancestry with another methods of appraisal for their predictive validity, it is bright that another methods are stronger predictors of assignment accompanying behaviours (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), however, personality measures are still advised reliable measures, accordingly should be acclimated to supplement another methods or assessment.
It is bright that the ethical implications of appliance personality assessments are an important factor, as they can access the aftereffect of the tests as able-bodied as the responses of the participants. If practitioners do not chase the actual procedures by accouterment able instructions and ensuring standardised conditions, it is acceptable that individuals will adios the tests (Kline, 2000:9). It is additionally important to accede the furnishings of demography a personality assessment, and again alive you bootless to accommodated the cut off point.
The way in which acknowledgment is accustomed can accept adverse furnishings of individuals accordingly the affair should be approached with attention (Toplis et al, 2005:37). In conclusion, there are a cardinal of issues that charge to be advised aback appliance personality assessments in a assignment setting. The annual of appraisal an individual’s behaviour through assessing their personality is clear, however, practitioners should be acquainted of the flaws in personality assessment, and be acquainted of another forms of appraisal aback selecting individuals for a job, to supplement personality assessments.
Word count: 2173 REFERENCES Arthur W. J. , Woehr D. J. , Graziano W. G. (2001). Personality Testing In Employment Settings: Problems And Issues In The Appliance Of Typical Another Practices. Personnel Review, 30(5),657-677 Bartram, D. (2004). Appraisal In Organisations. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 237-259. British Cerebral Association,(2000). Cerebral Testing: A User’s Guide Psychological. Leicester: The British Cerebral Society Furnham, A. , & Drakely, R. (2000). Predicting Occupational Personality Analysis Scores.
Journal of Psychology, 134, 103-111 Griffin, B. , Hesketh, B. , & Grayson. D. (2004). Applicants Appearance Good: Affirmation of Annual Bias In The Neo Pi-R. Personality and Alone Differences, 36 (7), 1545-1558. Griffith R. L, Chmielowski T. S, Yoshita Y. (2007). Do Applicants Fake? An Examination Of The Abundance Of Applicant Appearance Behavior. Personnel Review, 36 (3), 341–355. Hogan, J. , Barrett,P. , & Hogan R. (2007). Personality Measurement, Faking, And Employment Selection. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 92,(5), 1270–1285 Hough, L. M. , &Oswald, F. L. 2008) Personality Testing and Industrial– Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, And Prospects Industrial And Organizational Psychology, 1, 272–290. Judge, T. A. , Klinger, R. , Simon, L. S. , & Yang, I. W. F. (2008). The Contributions of Personality to Organizational Behavior And Psychology: Findings, Criticisms, And Approaching Analysis Directions. Amusing and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1982-2000. Kline P. (2000) The Handbook Of Cerebral Testing, (2 Ed). London: Routledge, Meyer, G. J. , Finn, S. E. , Eyde, L. D. , Kay, G. G. , Moreland, K. L. , Dies, R.
R. , Et Al. (2001). Cerebral Testing And Cerebral Assessment: A Review Of Affirmation And Issues. American Psychologist, 56, 128–165. Morgeson, F. P. , Campion, M. A. , Dipboye, R. L. , Hollenbeck, J. R. , Murphy, K. , & Schmitt, N. (2007). Are We Getting Fooled Again? Coming To Agreement With Limitations In The Use Of Personality Tests For Personnel Selection. Personnel Psychology, 60, 1029-1049 Mueller-Hanson, R. , Heggestad, E. D. , & Thornton III, G. C. (2003). Appearance and Selection: Considering The Use Of Personality From Select-In And Select-Out Perspectives.
Journal Of Applied Psychology, 88 (2), 348-355. Schmidt, F. L. , Hunter, J. E. (1998). The Authority and Utility Of Another Methods In Personnel Psychology: Practical And Theoretical Implications Of 85 Years Of Analysis Findings. Cerebral Bulletin, Vol. I24 (2), 262-74. Shum, D. , Myors, B. , & O'Gorman, J. (2006) Cerebral Testing and Assessment. Oxford:Oxford University Press Toplis, J. , Dulewicz, V. , & Fletcher, C. (2005) Cerebral Testing (4th eds). London:Institute of Personnel & Development.
Order a unique copy of this paper