TestGenius®: Online Pre-employment Testing Suite

Your Favorite Candidate Bombed the Skills Test. Now What?

May 20, 2020 by Lori Lee

It’s not uncommon for HR professionals to find themselves in sticky situations when conducting hiring processes. Candidates who share excellent résumés and impress during interviews often seem like the right choice — until they fail the skill and ability test or, worse yet, fail to perform on the job. When organizations see this happening, what is the appropriate response?

This question highlights why skills testing needs to be a bigger component in hiring processes. Skills-based assessments provide hiring managers with a different view of an applicant that goes beyond what a résumé or interview might show because they ask the applicants to complete tasks similar to those found on the job.

Why is that important? There is no doubt that both interviews and résumés are crucial when evaluating an applicant, but neither can paint the whole picture of a person’s capabilities. Résumés allow hiring managers to get acquainted with a candidate’s background and experience, but they’re often embellished.

Similarly, interviews are excellent barometers to evaluate an applicant’s communication skills and “presence,” but research indicates they’re terrible predictors of job performance. It’s challenging to get a full picture of candidates’ abilities during an interview because they genuinely desire to convey that they’re qualified when talking with hiring managers. And some hiring managers aren’t natural interviewers, which results in conversations being based more on overall impressions than how equipped a candidate might be for a role.

Skills tests provide a real-time display of a candidate’s aptitude. They enable hiring managers to see beyond the highlight reel of a résumé and engaging conversation during an interview to determine whether a candidate can perform critical duties on the job — and perform them well. In fact, the intel gained from these skills tests is the perfect complement to interview insights.

How Ability and Skills Tests Fit Into the Recruitment Process

Hiring managers have to take into account the results of failed pre-employment assessment tests, especially if they feel these candidates are a great fit and should still be considered. While it’s possible to lower cutoff scores, one must apply this new standard to all applicants.

Fairness must prevail, and standards must be equally applied. When applicants fail these skills-based tests, they’re deemed incapable of performing well based on their execution. Using tests to establish “minimum competence” can quickly cause awkwardness if a hiring manager wants to hire someone who is not ready and able to perform the job.

As with any pre-employment test, a skills-based assessment has to be chosen and administered with care. Not only do these assessments have to be legal, valid, equitable, and reliable, but they also need to be developed by experts.

Typically, skills tests are co-developed by industrial-organizational psychologists who are well-versed in industry research and best practices and by tenured subject matter experts (SMEs) who have an intimate understanding of the at-issue position. Together, they’re responsible for developing the content of the test as well as setting pass/fail cutoff scores for each assessment. TestGenius, for instance, has a function that aggregates SME opinions regarding job-relatedness and minimally qualified scores (cutoff scores), which allows tests to maintain a high degree of utility and establishes validity.

Skills tests can be critical components of efficient and effective recruitment. On average, a corporate job offer will attract roughly 250 résumés. A “test battery,” including a résumé screen followed by a skills-based assessment, is an effective — or high-volume — way to reduce the overall number of applicants while concurrently highlighting individuals who have the highest likelihood of success on the job.

What Employers Are Looking for in Assessment Tests

With all of this information in mind, what is the right way to apply the results of skills tests? Typically, those who fail pre-employment assessment tests never make it to the interview stage.

Skills-based tests are typically used in a strict pass/fail manner. Predetermined cutoff scores for tests can help identify candidates who don’t meet the minimum qualifications for a position and prevent them from advancing to the interview or getting the job. This isn’t the end of the story, though. Every person applying for a job should be given equal opportunity. It’s possible to lower the score cutoff for a candidate when the conditions call for it, but they need to be reduced universally.

For instance, in times of high demand, there may not be sufficient numbers of adequately skilled applicants. Testing helps to identify potential skills gaps so that employers can more readily determine the potential effectiveness of training or other remediation.

The results of assessment tests should be used in conjunction with other parts of the hiring process — like interviews or résumé screenings — all of which are tests in and of themselves. Each component should provide insight into different aspects of a candidate’s profile.

For instance, a candidate might excel in specific skill areas but ultimately not be a cultural fit for the organization. Conversely, candidates might test as slightly weak in a particular skill but still be minimally qualified. However, hiring managers can consider whether that weakness might be developed over time if the candidate is otherwise exceptional.

Ultimately, managers value more than just function: Traits like adaptability, self-awareness, and ability to inspire often factor into hiring decisions. Hiring assessment tests enable managers to use real-world scenarios to see whether potential hires can perform and to what degree they possess these overarching qualities that make employees — and workplaces — great.

To learn more about the skills tests we offer at TestGenius and how we can shape and strengthen your hiring process, click here.

How to Use Preemployment Tests and Mitigate Adverse Impact Along the Way

May 7, 2020 by Lori Lee

Plenty of recruitment and hiring professionals rely on applicant testing during the prescreening process. Assessments not only help narrow the field, but also shine a light on superstar performers.

Unfortunately, even the most professionally developed tests can impact members of certain groups differently. If that happens, the test is said to have an “adverse impact” on the negatively impacted group — turning the assessment test from a corporate asset into (potentially) an expensive liability.

What Is Adverse Impact?

Adverse impact refers to a procedure, practice, or test that consistently registers a substantially different passing rate between two groups, regardless of intent.

Many equate adverse impact to discrimination. This is not true. You will almost always be able to find adverse impact because data can be analyzed in any number of ways. But the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP) makes it clear that if a test potentially has an adverse impact, a rigorous validation process can prove the test is “valid and consistent with business necessity.”

For example, we often find that computer tests have an adverse impact on applicants from older generations. So many of the input devices that are necessary today (e.g., keyboards, mice, etc.) did not exist just a few decades ago. For most jobs, using a computer keyboard and mouse to enter data into specific fields is “valid and consistent with business necessity.”

Another adverse impact example would be physical ability testing. Women fail firefighter physical exams at a rate of 50-to-1, which is some serious adverse impact. That said, being able to drag a dummy to safety is necessary, so the adverse impact does not prevent the physical ability test from being used.

Some organizations have gotten into trouble because they tested for above-and-beyond job requirements. Imagine a job for which a worker has to carry 50-pound bags of concrete and stack them on pallets. If an organization tests with 95-pound bags — when bags on the job weigh no more than 50 pounds — the test would be deemed invalid, and the employer would be responsible for the adverse impact.

A couple of years ago, CSX Transportation paid $3.2 million to settle a sex discrimination lawsuit when its physical abilities test unfairly had an adverse impact on female job candidates. Per the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) allegations, CSX conducted isokinetic strength testing, a three-minute aerobic test, and arm endurance tests that had a discriminatory impact on women applying for jobs as conductors, material handlers, and clerks. The EEOC did not claim that the discrimination was intentional.

How to Mitigate Adverse Impact

Of course, skills-based tests aren’t always airtight, particularly if they’ve been developed in-house. Businesses that want to give all candidates the greatest chance of showing their abilities and acumen should focus on skills-based tests that show maximum utility at the least legal exposure risk.

Plus, leaders can go one step further by requesting or issuing a validity report. Software from TestGenius and CritiCall includes a content validation wizard that follows sections 14C and 15C of the UGESP; our software queries successful incumbent employees for specific information that builds a UGESP 15C validation report. The employer is then justified in using the test in a way that is “valid and consistent with business necessity.”

Furthermore, our validation process helps to hire better performers because it matches the test to products created on the job using skills necessary on day one. That makes it a win-win for the employer.

The 3 Types of Pre-Employment Tests — And Which Is Best for You

April 29, 2020 by Lori Lee

The market is flooded with pre-employment tests — and these hiring assessments vary widely in scope, relevance, and competence. Not surprisingly, businesses often find it tough to determine which types of pre-employment testing to use. Generally speaking, analyzing the position helps pinpoint the ideal assessment.

Consider high-flow positions, for instance. They’re the ones that generally attract thousands of résumés. In those cases, testing for basic or intermediate qualifications and skill sets can rapidly reduce the selections to a more manageable number.

High-stakes openings don’t necessarily generate tons of applications, but they require people who possess crucial and specific knowledge and abilities. A pre-employment test for these potential recruits will no doubt be comprehensive, evaluating candidates on various levels.

Finally, we come to positions that have a base rate. “Base rate” is a testing term that means a predictable percentage of people will already possess baseline core competencies. Someone of this caliber should meet or exceed the base expectations, which can be determined through pre-employment tests.

Which of the Different Types of Pre-Employment Tests Is Best?

After labeling each position, employers can then determine which types of pre-employment testing will be most apt to produce reliable, pertinent feedback for analysis. The three most widely used types of pre-employment screenings tend to fall into the categories of work simulations, cognitive tests, and personality assessments.

1. Work skills simulation testing: Typically resistant to court challenges based on the government’s Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, work simulations offer a high perception of fairness because they mimic what actually happens on the job. For example, firefighter applicants may be asked to undergo a series of simulations to show they have the requisite experience and education for the job.

How do you know whether an assessment falls into this category? It will focus on skills used as part of the daily or monthly operations. These skills can be specific (e.g., knowing how to use 90% of a software program) or broad (e.g., being able to perform general math functions). Applicants who pass simulations demonstrate job readiness, which is a strong predictor of long-term success.

2. Aptitude and cognitive testing: Cognitive testing can be notoriously tricky if it exhibits an adverse impact, which is the first element to activate an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission case. Adverse impact causes unfair, illegal discrimination or bias against a person from a protected class. A prime example of criteria that may adversely affect some workers is a credit check, which may favor individuals from more affluent circumstances.

Still, you shouldn’t avoid cognitive testing — despite its acknowledged downsides. After all, there are manybenefits of pre-employment cognition testing. Case in point: This type of assessment can gauge an applicant’s problem-solving skills, behavioral leanings, mental processing acumen, and learning potential. And as HireVue discovered through research, 62% of employers use cognitive tests to evaluate a candidate’s abilities.

3. Personality testing: For decades, businesses have built teams based around personality assessments. Personality tests help employers cherry-pick players most likely to fit into the corporate culture or team environment by measuring soft skills such as conscientiousness and sales acuity. The only problem with these kinds of appraisals is that applicants sometimes try to game the system by faking their answers.

As a consequence, recruiters may want to use personality tests as one of the last phases of the hiring process. Let’s say Company XYZ has three strong candidates for one role. XYZ’s leadership may want to ask each to complete a Myers-Briggs evaluation, DiSC assessment, CliftonStrengths assessment, or another pre-employment personality testing vehicle. Even if all the applicants base their answers on what they think XYZ wants to know, the hiring team will get a more thorough indication of the differences between the contenders.

Homegrown or Off-the-Shelf Pre-Employment Skills Testing?

From a big-picture standpoint, organizations and recruiters interested in using pre-employment testing have two choices: They can either buy ones that are commercially available or develop assessments internally. Those that pick the former route should be picky, making sure there’s a strong connection between the jobs they want to fill and what’s actually being tested.

Corporations that develop assessments in-house, rather than purchase off-the-shelf tests, must be careful to reduce bias in the questions. Many homemade tests have ended up in court. No brand wants a legal battle because its recruitment team used a pre-employment test that didn’t meet regulatory expectations.

For this reason, employers should carefully consider how to get what they need by offering a multipronged testing setup that includes a mixture of cognitive, personality, work simulations, and interviews.

Want to learn more about pre-employment testing options for your business? Visit the library of high-quality, high-return skill tests that TestGenius offers.