I keep thinking of a conversation that I had at the recent HR SouthWest conference in Fort Worth, with one of the vendors at the exhibition. During our conversation to help me to understand more about the vendors offerings, I was hearing about their pre-employment testing, background screening, assessments and thinking, OKAY you have to have a differentiator, and then they said 'Integrity Testing". Whaaa - I stopped them right there. Tell me more …..
Merchants Information Solutions Inc has had this “Integrity Testing” available to their customers since 1979 – called American Tescor’s behavioral psychological assessment - and they are now just starting to “market” it separately and with vigor. Okay this test will help you understand if someone is prone to theft, substance abuse, hostility and faking (really faking? What does that mean?).
I mean really, how can you tell if someone is going to be filled to the brim with integrity or if it just shows up in his or her character depending on the day and the temptation of the situation? Apparently they say they can, and they also say that they will give a GUARANTEE cost savings on the product, and if you don’t get that cost savings, you get your money back.
It got me to thinking – is integrity born with you, or do you grow into it/out of it? Nature vs. nurture? Is it something that will show up immediately? Or will it present itself as someone moves up the corporate ladder and the opportunities are more or that you are less likely to be caught and punished for small matters? Does integrity waffle on the balance depending on the environment you are in? Or as a strong person, with concrete morals and values, can you have semi-integrity, and still live with yourself? If this proves to be absolutely accurate – shouldn’t we give this test to our politicians?
Hmmm, me? Skeptical? BUT Merchants does have some white papers from Cornell Research to prove the point of this test being a highly effective way to eliminate high-risk hires, and save money. Worth a read.
I am sure that there are other companies that also have something similar to this, that I am sure, is a great money saver and absolutely essential in some industries. But where are they? AND why wouldn’t any company want to have a full employee base that has such strong integrity, for a positive environment. Which begs the next question – perhaps there is not enough people with integrity out there in the world to be able to do that! Yikes – my head hurts just thinking about it.
HR Buyers guide, thousands of white papers and other content related to human resources and more! 
Posts
7 comments:
Integrity tests (in one shape or another) have been around for quite a while. While I was not able to access the study you linked to (paywall), previous research for those instruments as selection tests indicate mixed results at best.
How well a test predicts job performance, or some dimension of it (such as employee theft in this case) is determined by its validity. In otherwords, the test vendor should quantify the relationship between test score and the behavioral dimension it purports to predict. Historically, validity coefficients for integrity tests have been pretty small and many are not statistically significant.
Many times employers are better off using a personality measure that has been validated for personnel selection (MBTI isn't). Results of the conscientiousness personality dimension is the most successful personality or "behavioral tendency" predictor available.
In terms of the general value of personality testing for predicting human behavior, most research I am familiar with indicates that the situation is a stronger signal for the appropriateness of human behavior.
I'm not saying these tests are useless, but I am saying that the vendor should provide prospective clients with empirical evidence in support of their claims. A validity study is a minimum requirement if your selection tool is to survive a litigation. A utility analysis would be better as this allows one to estimate the monetary value of said test.
Hope this wasn't too nerdy =)
Thanks George for your "nerdy" comments to my blog. I think that you added some very though provoking ideas,
Thanks again. Rita
Hi Rita,
I did two one-question surveys in the past few weeks to HR, talent management and business executives.
The first survey question was: What are the most important "people skills" to assess and develop in your employees, managers and leaders today?
#1 answer: emotional intelligence
The second survey question was: What are you doing -- or planning to do -- to develop your employees and management for the better?
#1 answer: annual performance review
Emotional intelligence assessments were almost dead last.
My point? Although there is two decades of reliable and valid science and research behind EI, the concept of is still fairly new to the workplace and to leadership (i.e., being emotionally self-aware and aware of others' emotions that can affect decision-making for the better).
Yes, companies like Coca-Cola, AT&T and Whole Foods, even the Air Force, are assessing for EI in hiring and developing EI in current employees and management see a definitive increase in productivity, retention and revenue.
But for many SMB, using behavioral assessments of any kind are still science fiction.
The bad news? There's still a lot of dysfunction out there.
The good news? There's still a lot of dysfunction out there.
I miss my peeps. ;)
Interesting post. I think humans are born with the ability to know right from wrong. However- if they grow up learning to circumvent the system, that lying is a way to get what you want and "it's all about me" - then they will continue to live that way. They will believe that is an acceptable way to navigate through life- stepping on everyone that crosses their path- without giving it a second thought.
Those that are raised watching those around them doing what is right- no matter how bad it hurts sometimes, then they will follow that example.
What does the law say about pre-employment testing?
Seems as though HR can't make someone participate - or - is non-participation an admission of guilt?
Now my heads hurting...
Fabulous comments and truly does make you think about the necessity of this kind of test. Perhaps that is why we do not see a marketing push on it.
It does rub against the fibre of human nature of being good, kind, honest - and say "well maybe we are not".
I miss you too Kevin.
Hi Rita!
Interesting post!
I have a thought or two about the comments posted:
Justin:
Re your question: "What does the law say about pre-employment testing?"
My understanding is that the tests must be valid, and job related. The seminal court case related to fence pole diggers being given a test for english usage, I believe.
However, unless the test itself can be shown to discriminate against a protected category (the excluded individuals turned out to be predominately black) then it isn't against the law.
BUT, and this is the important part, if the unvalidated test turns out to discriminate, then you are in trouble. THAT is why validated tests are important.
Regarding Kevin's comment: It is very hard to show validity and job relatedness for EI as well as integrity, and other non-skill related components. We can't even agree how to define integrity! That is essentially the problem.
I miss you too Kevin!
Post a Comment