Who hasn’t taken a psychometric test at some point? Few can say so, and if you haven’t yet, you can rest assured that your chance will come. Whether in the academic field, with orientation programs and admission processes that seek to guarantee your selection, or in the workplace, during hiring, annual evaluations, and team integration, these tests have become essential.
Although its frequent use seeks to improve decision-making and give more value to the work of professionals, it also has its risks.
Tests, which were once reserved for expert psychologists with in-depth training in psychometrics, are now accessible to everyone. The lack of legal regulations even allows their use without prior training. As a result, mistakes are made by poorly informed users, which compromise the quality of the analysis and can result in wrong decisions. Here are three typical mistakes.
Mistake 1: Using a test with dubious scientific validity
Imagine you are giving Mrs. T a test to hire her next executive assistant. The last employee left her job last month due to a lack of organization and initiative, two key qualities for the position.
The test shows that Mrs. T scores 8.7 for “organization” and 7.6 for “initiative.” You are satisfied with these results and decide to hire her, but six months later, you find yourself in the same situation again. The candidate who seemed ideal is performing poorly in the areas tested.
Speaking to a more experienced colleague, she discovers that the test she used is not very recommendable due to its metric deficiencies. The results can fluctuate a lot, meaning that Mrs T’s score of 8.7 could actually be a 6.2 or even a 5.7. To avoid this problem, it is essential to choose tests that offer accurate and reliable results.
Mistake 2: Using a single test for all
You are an expert at interpreting a well-known personality test, but when you want to diversify your practice, you find yourself in a bind with a client looking to hire a high-level manager. Using your usual personality test, you fail to meet the client’s expectations of specific details about the candidates’ abilities to lead multidisciplinary teams and negotiate with suppliers.
In this case, a test focused on managerial skills would have been the perfect tool, offering a clear view of each candidate’s potential for the specific role in question.
Mistake 3: Interpreting one factor at a time
To make sure you don’t miss anything, carefully review each factor measured by the tests. While this may be helpful for beginners, it is not the most effective strategy for professionals.
For example, Mr R is being evaluated for a manager position, but focusing only on his “will to power” does not give a complete picture of his profile. Considering other factors, such as “flexibility” and “free thinking,” might have shown him that his approach is more aligned with a participative management style, which allows for greater individual expression.
As Aristotle said, “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” It is therefore essential to approach testing in a global and dynamic way, considering the interaction of several factors to obtain a more complete and unique picture of each individual.
An effective solution to avoid these failures is, without a doubt, to have training in psychometric tests. This will allow you to learn how to interpret the results of various tests in a multifactorial way, and you can always count on the support of expert consultants to choose the most suitable tools for your needs.
