Reasons
to use pre-employment assessments
• Two of three new hires will disappoint in the first
year
• Two of three employees would rather work somewhere
else
• Ninety-five of 100 applicants will "exaggerate"
to get a job
• Most hiring decisions are made in haste - during
the first five minutes of an
interview.
• One of three businesses will be sued this year over
an employment issue
• Turnover costs thousands of dollars for every departing
employee
• Eighty percent of employee turnover is avoidable
AND...
You want employees who are dependable
In 1998, absenteeism cost employers $757 per employee, according
to a report in USA TODAY. This was the direct cost reported
by a survey of human resource professionals and does not
include the cost of hiring others or paying overtime to
perform the work of absent employees.
You can be held liable for employees' behavior on
and off the job
You must know the nature of the people you hire because
their criminal behavior could cost your business millions
of dollars. Every time you hire without practicing due diligence,
you may be accepting liability for their actions - even
when they are "off the clock."
You can be sued for illegal discrimination
In the absence of objective data, how can you demonstrate
a hiring/promotion decision was made objectively, without
discrimination because of gender, race, religion, etc.
Résumé writers write great fiction
In a survey of recent college graduates, 95% said they would
be willing to make a false statement in their résumés
in order to get a job. Forty-one percent admitted they had
already done so, according to a report in Nation's Business
(May, 1999).
Testing is acceptable, even expected
As reported in Molding Systems (May, 1999, v57 i5 p56(1)),
a survey found that 92% of job applicants accept testing
as part of the job qualification process. Only 3% resent
it, while 5% were neutral.
Assessments offer a solution
Historically, employers depend upon résumés,
references and interviews as sources of information for
making hiring decisions. In practice, these sources have
proved inadequate for consistently selecting good employees.
When training employees, a "one size fits all"
approach has failed to provide the desired results. When
selecting people for promotion, otherwise excellent employees
have too often been miscast into roles they could not perform
satisfactorily.
Clearly, an essential ingredient for making "people
decisions" has been missing from the formula.
The use of assessments has become essential to employers
who
• want to put the right people into jobs;
• provide employees with effective training;
• help their managers to become more effective; and
• promote people into positions where they will succeed.
The use of assessments has resulted in extraordinary increases
in productivity while reducing employee relations problems,
employee turnover, stress, tension, conflict and overall
human resources expenses.
Several factors contribute to the failure of traditional
hiring methods. Résumés often contain false
claims of education and experience while omitting information
that would help employers make better hiring decisions.
Business references are of little value because most past-employers
will tell you nothing but "name, rank and serial number."
These realities are the reason interviews have become the
most influential factor in hiring and promotion decisions.
However, experience shows only a coincidental correlation
between the ability to deliver well in an interview and
to deliver well on the job. Studies peg this correlation
at 14% -- one good employee in every seven hires. Even background
checks don't help much. The success rate becomes 26%, but
that's only one good hire in every four. Unfortunately,
many employers have accepted these poor results and the
high cost of excessive turnover as a business reality. They
have flown the white flag of surrender.
Don't Surrender! Assessments do help significantly
Assessing behavioral traits improved the hiring success
rate to 38%.
When both thinking abilities and behavioral traits are assessed,
the right people are hired 54% of the time.
When an assessment of occupational interests is added, successful
results improve to 66%.
The most impressive results are achieved, however, when
an integrated assessment is used - one that measures behavioral
traits, thinking, occupational interests, plus "Job
Match."
These integrated assessments employ cutting-edge technology
and empirical data to assess the qualities of "The
Total Person." In doing so, the individual qualities
of candidates are compared to the qualities of employees
who performing their duties in a superior manner. These
21st Century assessments successfully identify potentially
excellent employees better than 75% of the time.
Job Match outranks all other factors
A well-documented study, published in Harvard Business Review
concludes that "Job Match" is by far the most
reliable predictor of effectiveness on the job. The study
considered many factors including the age, sex, race, education
and experience of approximately 300,000 subjects. It evaluated
their job performance and found no significant statistical
differences, except in the area of "Job Match."
The conclusion: "It's not experience that counts
or college degrees or other accepted factors; success hinges
on a fit with the job."
The only reliable method for evaluating "Job Match"
is with a properly designed assessment instrument, capable
of measuring the essential job-related characteristics particular
to each specific job. Profiles International has assessments
designed for this purpose.
