The focus here is on personality profile fit and personality fit, culture fit, values fit and so on.
“Fit”-type personality tests include the following:
Firstly, Values Fit
Secondly, Culture fit
Thirdly, Strengths Fit
And finally, Careers Fit
Personality Fit Approach
In our opinion, job analysis is a crucial initial stage of test and exercise design projects.
Firstly, a range of job analysis techniques can be employed to gain an in-depth understanding of the key determinants of successful performance in any job role.
Secondly, a representative group of job incumbents need to be involved in this foundation design phase in order for occupational psychologists to analyse and group each important task and behaviour.
Thus, we believe these are the best job analysis methods to use:
- Firstly, Repertory Grid Technique.
- Secondly, Critical Incidents Technique (best for SJT design).
- Thirdly, Focus Groups (best for SJT and Realistic job preview design).
- Bespoke Questionnaires.
- Strategic Interviewing.
Specific projects that have encompassed such job analysis techniques include:
- Using a telephone based version of the critical incidents techniques on many SJT design projects.
- Developing two personality questionnaires using repertory grid, critical incidents and strategic interviewing – or using a telephone-adapted version on personality questionnaire design projects.
- Danger zone profiling.
- Designing a financial organisation’s competency sift process for three customer service roles.
- Role profiling and competency design.
- Use of repertory grid and critical incidents to design bespoke personality questionnaires.
- Focus groups, structured interviews to develop realistic job previews, situational judgement tests, and career guidance tools.
Test questions asking about previous working and life history facts. Biodata questions can include personal attitudes, values, beliefs. There are therefore both autographical and biographical perspectives, such as how effective previous working relationships were with managers and/or colleagues.
Biodata Face validity
Whilst biodata was popular in the 1970’s/80’s in the UK, it fell out of fashion due to concerns about face validity. Face validity is how job relevant a test’s questions appear to be. This is difficult to show with biodata’s indirect approach; posing biodata fit questions about past behaviours which can seem intrusive.
The biographic data are evaluated in the same way as test scores. The most predictive biographical items are chosen. Each one discriminates between success and failure. A good item is one in which the ratio of successes in one level of the item differs from the successes ratio in another level of the same item. Table 2 displays hypothetical examples of biographic information and their discriminate power. A different Biodata score should be calculated for each criterion. This involve more work but at the same time increases the accuracy of the prediction.
Now, consider another extreme example. A significant correlation between attendance at a circus show and success as a door-to-door sales-person. Thus, although previous success might be a good predictor of future success and dimensions underlying a “rational” biographic item are quite stable over long periods of time and can predict future behaviour and interests, there is a need for a distinction between items that measure past achievement, and those that indicate interest, motivation towards a particular activity, or even social status.
In our opinion, construct validity studeis of biodata scores are mainly based on the notion that past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour. Some attempts were concerned with an internal analysis of the biodata components. Others tried to provide a single explanation for the its predictive validity, suggesting a point-to-point correspondence between the item content and the criterion due to the fact that the item could be a sample of the criterion measure. Alternative explanations suggested that a degree of success in previous life stages is a good predictor of success in later stages regardless of the context of the success.
Personality tests vary considerably in length, from short Big Five measures (around 10 minutes) to in-depth measures with 16-32 scales (taking 35-50 minutes). Personality testing is less commonly used at the school-leaver level – compared to the graduate and managerial levels.
Assessments of personality are untimed but takes from 5-6 minutes for a Disc-like instrument to 25 mins for a 16PF.
There is only a strict time limit for ability tests.
The major generic ability test types are as follows: Verbal, Numerical, Abstract, Spatial and Non-Verbal.
Different types of ability tests are appropriate for different types of jobs and also for different job levels.
Psychometric tests by job level
A threefold differential of job level, together with the most commonly used ability tests, is:
- School-leaver level (Verbal/Literacy, Numerical Estimation);
- Graduate/junior managerial level (Verbal, Numerical, Abstract, Spatial, Non-Verbal);
- Senior managerial level (Verbal/Numerical/Abstract).
Three common job levels used are: ‘Operatives’, Junior Managerial/Graduate and Middle/Senior Managers.
– – – Personality Profile – – –
Psychometric tests for managers
For managers, you might expect up to 80 minutes of testing on ability (30 to 40 minutes for a verbal, 30 to 40 minutes for numerical). With lower levels, the time required drops dramatically with testing time of 10 to 15 minutes (simple checking, simple spelling, simple numeracy).
At the ‘Middle/Senior’ level, you have verbal and numerical plus specific applied aptitudes and competency assessments (assessment centre/development centre stuff). Personality is vital at this level.
GCSE Past Papers / A-Level Exams
Firstly, we hope you find these GCSE useful:
Secondly, likewise for these A-Level past papers:
London Private School Entrance
Firstly, Barnet / Secondly, Brent / Thirdly, Camden private schools / Next, City of London / Then, Croydon / Also, Ealing /And Enfield / Plus, Greenwich / Then, Hackney / Also, Hammersmith & Fulham / Plus, Hampstead / Next, Haringey / Also, Harrow / And Havering / Next, Hillingdon / Also, Hounslow / Then, Islington / Plus, Kensington & Chelsea / And Kingston-upon-Thames / Also, Lewisham / Merton / And then Notting Hill / Plus also Redbridge / Then Richmond-upon-Thames / And next Streatham / Also Southwark / Plus Sutton / Next Wandsworth / And then Westminster / Finally Wimbledon.
– – – Personality Profile – – –
– – – Personality Profile – – –