Attitudes Towards Candidate Testing- From Both SidesA Technically Compatible Whitepaper 26 February 2014

ConnectTechnically Compatible Tel: 0800 488 0175The Evolve Building Int Tel: +44 191 305 1042Rainton Bridge Business ParkHoughton-le-Sprint, Co DurhamDH4 5QY @TechCompatible

INTRODUCTION

There are many reasons that more employers have embraced pre-employment testing in recent years. Principally, it comes down to financial resources – testing can help significantly reduce recruitment costs and safeguard your business from a potential bad hire. In the same way some companies utilise testing to gauge suitability of personality traits, in industries that require a high level of technical proficiency, such as the IT industry, testing can also be used to vet candidates for the correct level of knowledge before reaching the interview stage. In a scenario where you may be experiencing a large volume of applicants for a position, being able to gauge

Principally, it comes down to

financial resources – testing can help

significantly reduce recruitment costs

“”

{Did You Kno

w?}

Leading UK graduate

recruiters receive an

average of

85 applications

per role.

technical proficiency early can become an invaluable way of saving on recruitment costs.

Testing can also help ensure you don’t pass over hidden talent. Through reading a CV alone, it is difficult to judge suitability for a role. However, having a CV alongside detailed testing scores in relevant subject areas can make it far easier to decide who you would like to invite for an interview.

While the benefits of pre-employment testing are clear, it is also important to consider all of the stakeholders in the process. What do they think of candidate testing? Could some candidates be put off if asked to complete a test? How much do employers really value them? And what about cheating? Would many candidates be tempted to try and beat the system? In this paper, we will explore these questions and more, to provide useful insight into the psychology of pre-employment testing.

Pre-employment Testing

The aim of this Whitepaper?

CANDIDATE PERSPECTIVE

In a recent survey of 534 UK graduates regarding attitudes toward unsupervised computer-based testing, almost 80% of respondents suggested they had completed an ability test for selection purposes. This isn’t surprising when we take that particular survey sample into account; being university students applying for graduate positions, it is fair to argue that this is a particularly difficult scenario for companies to differentiate between candidates.

According to the Association for Graduate Recruiters, leading UK employers receive on average 85 applications per graduate position. Alongside the fact that the majority of graduates will have little experience with which to differentiate themselves, this makes pre-employment testing a particularly good option for graduate employers.

The majority of those who had completed an unsupervised test had done so at home. This highlights one of the benefits of computerised testing from the candidate perspective; users can complete tests in their own time, where they feel most comfortable – arguably conditions which should facilitate optimum performance. A lesser number of people had completed a test in a shared computer room or private office, showing also that some appreciate being able to complete a test from a remote location should they need to.

of candidates have completed an

ability testbefore.

77%

45% of people suggested they had been somehow interrupted during a testing process, a surprisingly high number. The main causes highlighted were other people or a telephone / other electronic device. Candidates should learn from these findings and be sure they are make adequate preparations before beginning a test. Actively make others aware of what they are doing and its importance, while also turning off any devices that could well cause a distraction.

• Relevance to the role.• Ease of use.

• Level of support available.• Whether the test is used on a standalone basis or as part of a

wider assessment.

Also interesting is the fact that four out of ten respondents thought computerised ability testing was unfair. However, employers should take note that a number of manageable factors were found to influence how a test was perceived:

How widespread is Pre-employment testing?

Interruptions and fairness

85%at home

31%in a shared

computer room

18%in a private

office

Source: Cubiks - Review of candidate attitudes towards unsupervised computer-based testing 2006

Using these factors as a guide, employers should be able to achieve a relatively ‘fair’ testing process. ‘Ease of use’ and ‘Level of support’ can both be catered for simply by choosing the right testing platform. Use a service which is both comprehensive in question content and reporting, while still being simple to use from a candidate perspective, such as Technically Compatible.

Reinforcing test fairness.

CHEATING

One of the biggest perceived issues with unsupervised pre-employment testing is the possibility of cheating. Naturally, the environment for such testing cannot be controlled by the employer, meaning unscrupulous candidates could look to skew test results in their favour.

One in ten of those who had taken an unsupervised test admitted to some kind of cheating. This ranged from asking a friend or relative for help with the test to obtaining information on the questions in advance or practising under a pseudonym. A small number even reported they had been able to circumvent the technology used to host the test.

So what of ‘psychometric’ testing - a specific group of testing mechanics which are generally used to provide insight into a candidate’s personality traits. In a 2011 survey involving 286 participants, a number of questions were asked referring to the topic of psychometric assessment. We can see some of the headline statistics below, with 10% of respondents indicating that they had cheated on a psychometric assessment. This further reinforces the need for recruiters to use test results as a guide when interviewing candidates, rather than taking them as gospel used as part of, potentially critical, recruitment decisions.

10% Admittedto cheating on

a psychometric test.

31% Knew someonewho had cheated.

5% Thought othersdidn't cheat.

79% Agreed psychometric testing is a

useful tool.

33% of those who cheated created a

favourable impression of themselves.

31% Admitted they had considered cheating.

The Prevalence of Cheating

Source: Psylutions Research Whitpaper: Candidates’ Attitudes Towards Psych Testing and Cheating 2011

admitted some kindof cheating.

11%

5%asked a friend

or relativefor help.

4%obtained the

questions in advance or practised under

a psudonym

2%managed to

circumvent thetechnology

Firstly, it is inevitable in any testing situation that some cheating may occur. To provide a safeguard, recruiters should avoid relying solely on testing results for judgement, but rather use these as part of wider information gathering to inform recruitment decisions. Proper thought should also be given to which online testing platform to use. By using a platform such as Technically Compatible, which uses strict question time limits and would be very difficult to corrupt technically, will help reduce any potential exposure to cheating. Tight restrictions on exactly who can take a test, and how many times, will also help reduce the risk of candidates ‘practising’ beforehand through the use of a pseudonym.

What should you do differently?

EMPLOYER PERSPECTIVE

We can use information from a survey of 375 UK organisations on the topic of pre-employment testing to gain valuable insight. Perhaps a fairly obvious finding; almost all of the employers reported regularly seeing lies and exaggerations when receiving CVs and application forms. In fact, only 2% suggested that they had never identified a lie on an application.

When looking at reasons for candidate rejection, we find that lacking core skills for the position and a

perceived poor personality fit were the main two reasons respectively that candidates weren’t successful. This provides further justification for pre-employment testing. By testing for major core skills before offering a candidate an interview, businesses can avoid resource intensive interviews, saving time and money.

Similarly, recruiters can utilise psychometric testing to gauge the prospective personality fit of

a given candidate, again streamlining the process, improving recruitment efficiency.

of candidate rejections were due

to a lack of core skills

36%

Only 4% of employers surveyed said that candidates never asked them for feedback. It’s not surprising; we all like to know - if I have failed, why I have failed, and what we I do to avoid failure the next time. In the context of pre-employment testing, recruiters should make an effort to provide candidates with feedback in the form of results. Use a testing platform that includes reporting of some kind, to both help in your decision making, but also to communicate back to the candidate if they are unsuccessful.

Testing shouldn't be

unnecessarily long-winded, and should be hosted on a plaform that is

both intuitive to use and easy on the eye

“”

Overall, 58% of employers reported that online recruitment technology had made it easier for them to source the right candidates. Using pre-employment testing therefore, is arguably a no-brainer for businesses, helping to ensure that only candidates with the skills needed for the role are considered.

The need for Pre-employment testing?

Feedback and Technology

... while some were because of a poor

personality fit

33%

Smart employers should use a variety of selection techniques to ‘cover all of the bases’. A candidate can lie about their skills as they wish, but pre-employment testing offers some protection from an eventual bad hiring decision by actually testing for competencies.

Seeing through the lies.

It is important to consider testing platform technology. A significant number of employers suggested that they had lost candidates who had been unwilling to invest time in a particular selection process. Although it could be argued this reflects somewhat on the candidates in question, still make an effort to ensure your process is streamlined and relatively pain-free. Testing shouldn’t be unnecessarily long-winded, and should be hosted on a platform that is both intutive to use and easy on the eye.

Choose the right platform.

Source: Cubiks - Review of candidate attitudes towards unsupervised computer-based testing, The Employer Perspective 2006

ConnectTechnically Compatible

The Evolve BuildingRainton Bridge Business Park

Houghton-le-SpringCo Durham

DH45QY

Tel: 0800 488 0175Int Tel: +44 191 305 1042

@TechCompatible