Discussion Questions
1 Have you ever participated in pre-employment testing? If so, what types of questions were asked? What was the outcome? Diane Dupont
-I personally have participated in pre-employment testing. The type of questions I can recall being asked was mostly scenario type questions to see what I would do in the position. For example,If a customer was irate about a bill she received what would you do to assist and deescalate the call?Other types of questions I have been asked was: What types of words best describe you, I have been given a typing test as well as a math test. My outcome for the each of the different examples was always with me moving forward with the employment process. So I always figured I passed or the results were always what they wanted to allow me to move forward.
2. Do you think cognitive tests help the company economically? Explain your answer.
-Personally, I do believe testing helps a company save tremendously. Not only is the company saving money, but the company is also saving time. As in the article “Once you have a pool of candidates that meet some minimum competency requirements, further assessments can be very beneficial in selecting the best talent [to fit the job] and the organization”, says Barry Kozloff president of SRI. However, when you sit back and look at what he says it does make perfect sense. Ultimately, testing becomes your process of elimination for unfit candidates. Financially it cost when it comes to the hiring process i.e. background check, drug test, and even training in some cases.
3. Do you believe that pre-employment testing has biased outcomes for protected groups? Explain. After reading the article, do you believe that this type of bias is ever acceptable? Support your answer.
-I don’t believe that the pre-employment test has any bias within them. Based on the article that I read even if it were possible which it has not been proven to be I personally don’t think that is something that could be possible against protected groups. From my understanding when it comes to pre-employment test it’s a standardized test, just as if you were going to take the SAT or ACT. You can’t prepare for it, and the test doesn’t know who is taking it.
4. What do you think about the executive attention test discussed in the second article? What screening methods do you suggest that HR professionals use for screening applicants?
- I believe that the executive attention test is a great substitute that was created to help the protected groups, which seem not to do so well with the standard test. I think the best option to help HR executives with screening should be both test, the standard intelligence test as well as the Executive attention test. Therefore, it will allow HR professionals to be able to compare both results allowing them to maximize the opportunity for a great candidate.
Response: I believe that Ms. Dupont’s views are very reasonable. It is very important to integrate these two types of tests in order to try to eliminate some of the bias that they may present. Even though it was not in the questions directly, I also believe that pre-employment interviews are important and should be kept in mind in order to produce quality businesses with dedicated and proficient workers.
1. Have you ever participated in pre-employment testing? If so, what types of questions were asked? What was the outcome? Luis Vega
I have participated in pre-employment testing as part of the hiring process for a job I was applying for. It was a psychological test called The Reid Report. It is a timed test consisting of 50 to 100 questions asking the same thing in different ways. The test measured integrity attitudes, social behavior, substance use, and work background. Depending on how you answered the questions the results would suggest that you were a recommended hire or not a recommend hire.
For example, there is a question asking if you have stolen anything in the past. Another question asks “If someone takes office supplies home from work, is that stealing?” and another question asks “if you walk out of a store and realize that you were not charged for an item, would you return it or keep it?”.
I did very well on that test. The hiring manager said I was highly recommended for the job based on how I answered the questions. But if you know how to take those types of tests you can see the pattern of the questions and you will have an idea of what they are looking for.
2. Do you think cognitive tests help the company economically? Explain your answer.
Depending on the type of position a company is hiring for, cognitive tests will help a company economically. Cognitive tests can assist a company in finding the right person that will fit within the company’s culture and someone that can contribute to the company in a positive way.
For example, if a company is looking for researchers for their R & D Department to invent the next big product, the company will want to test the applicant’s cognitive thinking. The company can use cognitive tests to find the brightest people for the positions. If the people that are hired based on the results of these tests and they invent the next big product that will be an economic win for the company.
3. Do you believe that pre-employment testing has biased outcomes for protected groups? Explain. After reading the article, do you believe that this type of bias is ever acceptable? Support your answer.
I found the beginning of the article to be a little offensive. The article starts off by saying “Intelligence tests are considered strong predictors of work performance. But they have a major downside: Black and Hispanic job candidates tend not to perform as well on such tests,” (Meinert, D. 2011) Are they saying that blacks and Hispanics and not smart enough to take and pass an intelligence test? Or that intelligence tests need to be dumbed down so they can pass them?
That being said, I do believe in pre-employment testing. Companies need to find the best candidate for the position they are filling. Some of these pre-employment tests can assist companies determine if a candidate will be a good fit for the company’s culture and if the candidate has what it takes to be successful in the company.
An example would be fire fighter applicants. They take in depth pre-employment tests. This is important because you need the best candidate that has the mental ability to handle the job and the stress that comes with it. They have to be mentally strong. If fire fighters did not take pre-employment tests, the fire department would take anyone that wanted to be a fire fighter.
If the pre-employment test is geared for the position the applicant is applying for then there will be some sort of bias because the company is looking for a certain person to fill the open position. As a society we need to keep standards high. Over the last 20 years we keep lowing standards for almost everything we do so we can avoid hurting someone’s feelings. If someone does not have the skills needed for a position, then they should not get the position.
4. What do you think about the executive attention test discussed in the second article? What screening methods do you suggest that HR professionals use for screening applicants?
The executive attention test is a test I was not familiar with however, it sounds like a good test. It measures the applicant’s ability to multitask. By doing this the company puts the applicant in simulated office settings and they measure the applicant’s abilities to perform the tasks
Response: Mr. Vega raises a very good point with regards to testing: de facie validity. Often, these types of tests are very straightforward, and they end up measuring how witty and intelligent a person is, instead of what they intended to measure. This is because the person can directly see what the test is measuring and manipulate it. Nevertheless, I think that he misunderstood the bias that intelligence tests inherently have. It does not mean that minorities are less intelligent, but that they perform badly on intelligence tests. Furthermore, he should not be offended because the article attempts to solve this dilemma.
Have you ever participated in pre-employment testing? If so, what types of questions were asked? What was the outcome? Adriana Monllau
I have never participated in pre-employment testing. For my current job I had to pass some tests but they were not part of the hiring and selection process; they were just test for new hires to get familiar with banking regulations and compliance laws. I did once participate in a psychological test when I was applying for a university. It was a really long test and in my opinion it does not accurate evaluates a person. In this types of test people usually tend to respond what they think is the “correct” answer but not what they really will do in certain situations.
Although I have never participated in pre- employment testing, I found them not always accurate with their outcomes. Both cognitive and physiological assessments do not always provide a realistic answer of who is going to perform better in a specific position. How Barry Kozloff from the article says “Testing should be used within a system of multiple assessment methods"
In my opinion tests help the company economically, especially in cases where a large number of applicants need to be evaluated. Testing helps to initially reduce rapidly the total number of applicants. Once there is a pool of candidates that meet some minimum competency requirements, employers implement further assessments to select the best talent to fit the job and the organization. But, how the article says, it is demonstrated that cognitive tests have a substantial degree of adverse discrimination. To avoid possible lawsuits for possible discrimination test results should be the last piece of data HR and hiring managers review in drawing conclusions about a person's abilities. Testing should be used within a system of multiple assessment methods.
3. Do you believe that pre-employment testing has biased outcomes for protected groups? Explain. After reading the article, do you believe that this type of bias is ever acceptable? Support your answer.
I do believe that pre-employment testing has bias outcomes for protected groups. Pre-employment tests are usually based on general information and apply the same types of questions to all possible groups of candidates. Different demographic groups will have clear differences in responses. In my opinion it is not the test itself what produce bias outcomes, it is the application of the test what makes the difference. If tests are implemented equally to all demographic groups, protected groups are going to be always excluded from the hiring and selection process. That is why tests should be prepared and implemented accordingly to the groups that are going to be tested. However, how the article says, this type of bias is acceptable if the employer shows job relatedness through a professionally sound validation study. It has to be a necessity for the employer to implement a test to better know who is going to perform better and the employer demonstrate that people who get higher scores in the test are the people who actually perform better. When the test’s results are an actually parameter of how well a person will perform, in this case a bias should be accepted.
4 What do you think about the executive attention test discussed in the second article? What screening methods do you suggest that HR professionals use for screening applicants?
I am in favor of all that could reduce disparities in the hiring and selection processes, therefore I am in favor of executive attention tests. I think that executive attention tests are better to obtain a sense of how candidates will perform in their jobs. In today’s professional world it is extremely important a person’s ability of multitasking. Job positions often requires the ability of work under pressure and perform several tasks at the same time to be efficient. In my opinion, that is why it is not sufficient have a high IQ it is also important how to manage situations that requires multitasking and decision making under pressure.
Response: Here Ms. Monllau addresses what Mr. Vega also stated about pre-employment testing: that it is very malleable. This obviously leads to ineffective outcomes because it is not adequately measuring what it believes to measure. I am not sure, but I doubt that a company can be sued for applying intelligence tests in order to find suitable employees. This is something that we both should look into, but I would find it to be somewhat silly, as these tests are supposed to be backed by science. Finally, I believe that preparing and implementing tests for certain groups in the hiring process would be highly discriminative. I think that it is important to notice that the hiring process itself is discrimination: one only has a certain amount of job positions, so one must select that amount of people, leaving the other people behind. It should be a meritocratic process, which obviously leads to discrimination. However, it should be according to merits (academic, experience, etc.), not race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
