Currently, picking the right person for a job opening has never been more important Dr. Mornell (2003) once stated that if employers make mistakes during the hiring process and discovers this about six months later; they will have to spend two and a half times their annual salary to find a replacement. The mistake of hiring people not competent enough in their jobs is very costly. Nowadays, it is very crucial to accomplish a job fit. Job fit refers to the levels to which an individual’s cognitive capacity, interests, and personality dynamic match those required for the employment opportunity. According to Lovelace and Rosen (1996), lack of job fit in is highly linked with job dissatisfaction, job-related stress, and motivation to leave a company. However, where there is job fit in, satisfaction intensifies, turnovers are lowered, and employees become more productive. Even after these discussions, the most fundamental question to ask ourselves is how can an employer achieve a job fit in for every employee? Being employed in the contemporary world needs more than filling an application and attaching one’s curriculum vitae and cover letter (Mooney, 2002). Many employers have resolved to the use of pre-employment tests to help in achieving a job fit in. Pre-employments tests consist of a variety ranging from simple drug tests to highly develop psychological and personality tests. All these tests are bound to particular levels of federal and state laws that should be observed when the tests are being administered. Additionally there are laws that protect employees after being hired. The laws set to protect potential workers usually spin around anti-discrimination guidelines (Criteria Corp, 2006). In all the states, employers are usually cautioned against discrimination during the hiring process based on gender, race, disability, and sexual orientation among others. Particular pre-employment tests may violate the rights of potential employees if wrongfully administered. The paper will talk about different types of pre-employment tests as well as their relating laws.
More often, the tests are referred to as psychological tests and lack a standard taxonomy. The tests differ massively in terms of the content, structure and intent, and the legal issues pertaining to them. Some of the types of pre-employment tests include clinical personality tests, personality tests, cognitive skill tests, polygraph tests, medical tests, and drug tests.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
First, drug tests are the most common pre-employment tests administered to employees before joining any organization. Sometimes, it is administered in the course of an employment. Drug and substance abuse are popular among employees and usually affect their productivity negatively. It a type of a screening tool that helps a company avoid any liabilities or harm that might be caused by an abuser. The laws pertaining to drug tests usually vary from state as well as organization to organization. Whereas some states do not condone the use of drug tests, others accept it. Particular industries like railroads and public transportation are required to carry out drug tests on their employees before assuming any tasks.
Secondly, aptitude tests are those used to measure creative and critical thinking, problem solving, and the skills to analyze new information. Generally, these cognitive tests examine the employees’ intelligence and mental capabilities. They can be used in almost any occupation. However, they are common and very essential for middle and higher-level jobs. These tests are often perceived to be good predictors of good or poor job delivery. Past research has indicated that the aptitude tests are very effective as compared to the common hiring procedures such as interviews (Roth and Campion, 1992). In fact, they can be four three times very predictive like the educational backgrounds. Highly related to these test are personality and psychological tests.
Personality tests are often popular among human resource professionals even though there have been controversial issues on the appropriate ones to be used. The major objectives for the use of personality tests are to discover if employees will be comfortable enough in their positions, and if they possess behavioral traits that are associated with success in the respective position. The main difference between aptitude tests and personality test is that the latter has no right or wrong answers. When it comes to personality traits, none is superior to the other. Every personality type has its strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, administering the tests will help the employers to match the required behavioural traits to a specific job. Besides, they determine the future behaviours of employees in relation to an organization’s culture (Parish, 1989). Personality tests are of many types, but the most used tests employ the framework known as the Big Five or the Five Factor model. According to standard empirical research, the five dimensions of personality include agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, openness, and stability. Some of the personality test includes Minnesota Mulitiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), California Personality Inventory (CPI), and Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI) among others.
Moreover, polygraph tests area used by some employers to examine the degree of integrity the potential workers possess (Ryan and Sackett, 1987). However, the federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act forbids the use except for specific companies such as government intelligence organizations. Simply, polygraph examinations should not be part of hiring requirements.
In some cases, it is critical to select tests that highly relate to the job. Furthermore, sometimes the use of tests may be illegal especially when dealing with people having disabilities. For instance, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) forbid the utilization of pre-hire tests that may be perceived as medical exams. One of the primary roles of ADA is to ensure that there is no discrimination against people of special population such as those with psychiatric and physical disabilities. Therefore, it means that tests designed to evaluate the mental health of individuals such as clinical personality tests should not be used on them during hiring process. However, in some instances there can be exceptions. For example, tests deemed “medical” could be administered only if their validity highly relate to the job description and match the business goals. Normally, such decisions affect jobs that require public safety such as screening police officers for mental stability. Although, tests that are considered ore of “medical exams” should not be used during the hiring process.
In conclusion, pre-employment tests assist organizations to register improvements in several business ventures as well as boosting their objectivity and legal defensibility during and after the hiring process. Every company should work towards ensuring that all their pre-employment tests methods observe equality and are legally conforming. So long as these tests evaluate the appropriate skills and behavioural traits that correlate with the job description, utilizing the tests during the hiring process will make them more defensible. Hence, the companies that strictly administer these tests in line with the legal directives are usually at a good position to defend their actions in case a challenge may come up. Most laws pertaining to the hiring process are normally listed in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP). It is a guideline that gives the employers the mandate to administer fair tests on potential employees. Also, the guidelines interpret the charges by federal agencies on employers abusing the Civil Rights Act (Criteria Corp, 2006). However, it should be noted that the tests must highly relate to the job to avoid any discriminations.
References
Criteria Corp. (2006). Legal Issues Relating to Pre-Employment Testing Retrieved on 10 August 2016 from http://www.criteriacorp.com/resources/definitive_guide_legal_issues_of_preemployment_testing.php
Lovelace, K., & Rosen, B,. (1996). Differences in achieving person-organization fit among diverse groups of managers. Journal of Management , 22 (5), 703-722.
Mooney, J. (2002). Pre-employment testing on the Internet: Put candidates a click away and hire at modem speed. Public Personnel Management , 31 (1), 41-52.
Mornell, P. (2003). 45 effective ways for hiring smart!: How to predict winners and losers in the incredibly expensive people-reading game Random House Digital Inc.
Parish, D. C,. (1989). Relation of the pre-employment drug testing result to employment status: Journal of General Internal Medicine , 4 (1), 44-47.
Roth, P. L., & Campion, J. E,. (1992). Analysis of the predictive power of the panel interview and pre‐employment tests: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , 65 (1), 51-60.
Ryan, A. M., & Sackett, P. R,. (1987). Pre-employment honesty testing: Fakability, reactions of test takers, and company image: Journal of Business and Psychology , 1 (3), 248- 256.
