As a pre-employment testing provider, we offer both general aptitude and personality tests, as well as micro-skills tests such as typing tests and computer skills assessments. We’ve written about some of the differences between general tests and more specific tests, and we’ve found that many people continue to have misconceptions about the profound differences between general and specific tests, both in terms of the science behind them and the types of results companies should expect from them.
Emotional intelligence is a hot topic in HR lately and, at face value, it seems like an attribute that every great employee should have. But how do you define and measure emotional intelligence well enough to seek it out in your job candidates?
How can you tell if your job applicants have what it takes to succeed in a particular position? There are so many factors that go into a hiring decision, and resumes can only tell you so much. Resumes are notoriously unreliable, with research suggesting that up to 78% of resumes contain misleading statements, while 46% contain actual lies. Similarly, your candidates’ work experience and educational background aren’t a guarantee that they possess critical thinking skills or problem solving ability, and these factors have been shown to be poor predictors of future job performance. Sometimes the best way to dig deeper into what your candidates can actually do is by testing their abilities.
You’re forgiven if you didn’t know it was Math Awareness Month, but there are a lot of reasons why everyone should be more aware of the important role math plays in the workplace and in our everyday lives. With more and more evidence that Americans are falling behind in math ability compared to other developed nations, math ability is, in the United States at least, a gravely undervalued commodity.
Cognitive aptitude tests are some of the best tools for predicting job performance. In fact, one of the best known reviews of research in the field of employee selection demonstrated that cognitive aptitude tests are far more predictive than some of the most common hiring criteria – they are twice as predictive as job interviews, three times as predictive as work experience, and four times as predictive as education level.*
Last summer we reacted to an interview with Laszlo Bock at Google who seemed to say that tests scores and grades were useless predictors for hiring decisions. We said that what constitutes information for hiring purposes at Google may well differ from what constitutes information for hiring elsewhere, and we pointed out that validating a selection tool after it has been used, and only for those who were selected will typically yield lower estimates of the usefulness of that tool.
Today's blog post is by Eric Loken, Criteria's Chief Research Scientist and a member of Criteria's Scientific Advisory Board. Eric plays a leading role in the development of Criteria's employment tests.