Psychometric Tests and Interview Questions - Assignment Example

HRM Psychometric Tests The personality of an individual can determine the way they interact with others and react to situations. It can also affect how they respond to the stresses created by the working environment how productive they are when they are faced with deadlines and other pressures. In fact, there have been theorists such as Lee et. al. (2005) who have said that certain types of personalities are more productive in some positions than others which means that a person could be more useful to an organisation as a manager of a group than an ordinary member of the group. This is because certain personal traits like being aggressive, having patience etc. are more useful in some position and less useful in another position. Personality affecting performance is very true when it the personality connects with the type of job being done (Nikos, 2004). For example, it might be better for a telephone support operator to have a higher level of patience while it would be good for a salesperson to be more social in order to get along with clients. However, the legal considerations for recruitment and retention of employees must be kept in mind while the personalities of individuals are being tested (CIPD, 2007). The CIPD (2007) reports that psychometric testing is a part of the abilities test that some organisations in the UK conduct. Nearly half of all companies in the UK conduct general abilities test while more than a third will give out personality evaluations before hiring someone. However, refusing a job to someone based on their personality evaluations may be legally questionable. This is because Brown (1999) has noted that the productivity demanded by a company and the motivation provided by the managers working for the company can also go a long way towards influencing behaviour. Of course this does not take the idea of personality out of the equation since elements within a worker’s personality can influence their performance. Clarke and Robertson (2005) created a factorial model that assigns relative scales to define an individual’s personality. These factors can be used to show a person’s aptitude for, and expected performance levels in certain positions. These factors become various degrees of neuroticism, extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness. In the context of work performance and personality, neuroticism is a trait which allows a person to become unpleasant and have negative emotions quickly as a result of the situation they are placed in. Extroversion depends on how likely the person is to have high energy levels and how likely they are to seek the company to others. In the same manner, agreeable individuals are more likely to be sympathetic and helpful while Conscientious persons are likely to behave with discipline and show responsibility towards others around them. Finally, a person who is high on the openness trait could be useful in a situation that demands creativity since being open to new ideas as well as being imaginative is a personality trait of those who are higher on the scale when it comes to openness (Clarke and Robertson, 2005). There has been a lot of research conducted in to these personality traits that clarify a link between personality and job performance and the evidence collected has shown that a person with a proactive personality is more likely to perform better than a person who has a negative personality (Erdogan, 2005). Keeping that in mind, it becomes clear that personality testing and skills evaluation can be an important part of the recruitment process; so that the company can match the personality of the individual with the requirements of the position (Murphy, 2005). However, such tests and their results have to be taken with a grain of salt because real control on such tests is difficult to achieve since the answers given by the individual may not be the exact way they feel (CIPD, 2007). Furthermore, the test as well as the testing procedures may need to be changes depending on the position and the nature of work. For example recruitment for a technical position where there is little need for interaction with others would not benefit from a test that evaluates people skills. It is easy to conclude that personality testing and individual personality evaluations can be used as a guide to the expected performance of an employee but they can not be the only criteria for hiring a person. The environment provided by the company and the individuals managing the organisation may become more important for increasing and improving the performance of the employee than anything else. While we may have improved scales of evaluating the productivity of a worker as it concerns their personality, the other legal and ethical issues surrounding the problem must not be left out of the picture. Interview Questions Personal philosophy My own desire to work does not come from the money associated with it, although I will certainly admit that it is certainly one of the many reasons. It also does not come from the respect given to gainfully employed people in society since that is something which has been accorded to all workers for centuries. Rather, it comes from my inner desire to help others to be effective members of society and create a world of a society where workers are treated with equality. Fundamentally, I want to work since it will allow me in some small way to improve our society for a better and brighter tomorrow. That is the reason why my personal philosophy of work leans towards believing that work should be used to develop individuals in such a way that improvements are made in their complete personality than mere skill advances. A manager should act as a councilor to the workers and be able to discuss the issues faced by the workers on a level which is acceptable to them. While performance and profits as well as their creation is important, a worker should also be given tools which enhance his/her social and personal skills. Explain what irritates you about colleagues? How would you deal with it? I believe that Irritations and conflicts between employees are created due to a lack of communications between them and it can be damaging to the productivity of a company. Since the problem is communications, anything which improves communication would a good method to be used to deal with the situation. If I cannot handle the situation on my own I would discuss my situation with my manger and bring to his/her attention the situation that I am facing. Of course, I understand it is perhaps my actions and methods which are having a negative effect on the working environment and I would certainly be willing to bring about any changes that are needed. I also believe that minor irritations and conflicts between any two individuals, particularly office colleagues is a part of office life. However, effective management and controls established by the company can go a long way towards reducing such situations from being created in the first place. What irritates me most often about some of my co-workers is that they may make assumptions about what I imply or what I mean without clarifying what I have said and that can lead to future misunderstandings that can be easily avoided. Using Persuasion Successfully I have a good opinion about my personality skills and abilities to persuade others and even though this confidence can be misplaced, there are several incidents that I can recall where I used my persuasive powers to convince others to take my point of view of a given situation. For example, I was once placed in a work situation with a person who did though that his position and level within the company was so low that he would not come in the eyes of the management if he did not follow all the rules or if he did not do exactly as he had been asked to do by the managers. This was certainly a false belief since I had known the company to be very particular about certain situations and I knew that sooner or later this person would land in trouble. I had heard through the grapevine that this person was about to be called to the big office very soon if their performance did not improve and if they did not start following the rules of the company. I knew I had to step in and help the person before he was blindsided by the idea that he was safe in his conduct. I took him out to lunch one day and had a long chat with him about the situation and informed him what I had heard through unofficial channels. The person was not convinced at first but I gave him several examples of his own colleagues that believed in the rules laid out by the company and accepted them to be the part of the requirements for working with the company. By the time we called for coffee after lunch, my colleague had certainly changed for the better and I saw a definite increase in performance in the coming weeks. Works Cited Brown, K. 1999, ‘Social Cognitive Theory’. University of South Florida, [Online] Available at: http://hsc.usf.edu/~kmbrown/Social_Cognitive_Theory_Overview.htm CIPD. 2007, ‘Psychological testing’, [Online] Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/recruitmen/tests/psytest.htm Clarke, S. and Robertson, I. T. (2005). A meta-analytic review of the Big Five personality factors and accident involvement in occupational and non-occupational settings. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 78(3), Pg. 355-376. Erdogan, B. (2005). Enhancing Career Benefits of Employee’s Proactive Personality. Personnel Psychology, 58(4). Pg. 859-891 Lee, K. et. al. (2005). Personality Correlates of Workplace Anti-Social Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(1), Pg. 81-98. Murphy, N. 2005, ‘Graduating from selection’, IRS Employment Review, vol. 832, no. 1, pp. 42-43. Nikos, B. (2004). The relationship between disposition and career success. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 77(3), Pg. 403-420. Read More