1. Student ID: 08006321 Page 1 of 16 C. Shaw
Staffordshire University
Business School
Module Code: BSB10183-3
Assessment Type: Progress Report
Assessment Title: Project
Module Leader: Gerard Ryan
Assessment Tutor: Christine Shaw
Campus: Stoke
Semester: Semester 2
Year: 2010-2011
Student Id: 08006321
Hand in date: 4th
May 2011
Word count: 2000 words (+/- 10%)
Actual words used: 2199
2. Student ID: 08006321 Page 2 of 16 C. Shaw
Contents
1. Introduction...................................................................................... p. 3
2. Literature Review............................................................................ p. 4 - 9
3. Conclusion....................................................................................... p. 9 - 10
4. References...................................................................................... p. 11 - 14
5. Appendix......................................................................................... p. 15 - 16
3. Student ID: 08006321 Page 3 of 16 C. Shaw
“Personality Psychometric Testing (PPT) as a part of Business Recruitment:
Does it improve the chances of employing the best people for the job?”
Introduction
As the choice of candidate increases, more companies are looking to use
psychometrics within selection processes, to find the most suitable. This paper aims
to review literature surrounding Psychometrics, focusing on the „Personality Testing‟
aspect, with the objective of assessing whether it suggests, use in modern day
recruitment increases chances of employing the „best people for the job ‟, A notion
deemed by Oliviera (2009) as; “something of a paradox”.
Research questions/objectives include;
What are the main arguments which support/refute the notion of Personality
Psychometric Testing (PPT) improving chances of employing the best people
for the job?
Explore validity of personality tests using an example, the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator.
Are there any key ethical issues associated with the use of psychometrics?
This topic was chosen due to personal interest in the use of psychology in business
selection following personal experiences. The review may be of interest to any
managers/interviewers or employees involved in „Human Resources‟ or
„Organisational Behaviour‟ of a business due to cost and also its effects on
potentially, the workforce morale.
The literature review will contribute evidence for each of the research questions
listed above. The main body of the text will begin by reviewing the main topics and
arguments surrounding the use of „Personality Psychometric Testing‟ and will filter
down to the particular validity of such tests, using sustained arguments throughout,
from which a conclusion can be drawn.
4. Student ID: 08006321 Page 4 of 16 C. Shaw
Literature Review
Many companies, such as Marks
and Spencer‟s use Psychometric
testing as a part of their selection
process. In 2005, according to the
Times Top 100 list, as cited by
Parkinson (2005) and shown in
the graph opposite;
“Over 70% of companies use tests of this nature”.
Psychometrics consists of two aspects; ability and personality testing. Personality
tests, “aim to gauge the innate traits and characteristics of people, codify them and
compare them with others” (Roberts (1997).
Literature surrounding these tests is mainly based around issues such as “the extent
to which personality is measureable” or “the extent to which specific characteristics
can be identified as being necessary or desirable for a particular job” (Beardwell et al
(2004)). The latter of these could be viewed as more important as it is therefore
down to perception of what qualities are good/more desirable.
The first point to be made are the arguments for using Psychometrics as a part of the
selection process, what these tests show in relation to what interviewers want to find
out.
After undertaking research, Branine (2008) discovered that over 66% of respondents
said they used personality tests because they “allow for individual differences to be
explored in applicants”. This suggests that employers have a predetermined list of
traits which show them that the interviewee will be successful/unsuccessful in the
desired role.
5. Student ID: 08006321 Page 5 of 16 C. Shaw
Sackett and Lievens (2008) agree, claiming;
“Many employers look for applicants who are motivated, flexible, pragmatic,
dynamic, responsible, intellectually aggressive and able to work both
independently and in a team”
Material suggests that the use of psychometric tests yields knowledge of perceived
importance to interviewers. This suggestion is supported by Jenkins (2001) who,
after carrying out personal research, came to the conclusion that;
“Psychometric tests are able to make valid predictions about job performance,
across a broad range of different jobs”.
The main argument within this topic, as highlighted in the work of Furr and Funder
(2007), centres on the concept of validity where, they describe it as a „psychometric
concern‟. Other academics agree with this idea that information gained from „PPT‟ is
erroneous due to lack of reliability.
Newell (2006) believes that the decision to choose a candidate based upon results of
these tests can be, in itself, „wrong‟. This feeling may be based on the results of
earlier work by people such as Barclay (1999) who, considers statements like
„Personality being a stable concept‟ and „there are certain personality characteristics
suited to certain jobs‟, nothing more than “questionable assumptions”. Some authors
such as Laming (1997) actively challenge these assumptions arguing that;
“Personality and intelligence are not normally distributed and such an
assertion is a deceitful product of factor analysis”
Within the testing itself, some academics looked to prove the unreliability of the
results gained. Searle (2003) in particular discovered that some participants in tests
gave false answers due to either misinterpretation of the question or general
confusion. It was stated that;
“While a response was provided it did not reflect what they say in an
interview”.
6. Student ID: 08006321 Page 6 of 16 C. Shaw
This statement highlights a massive flaw in the testing situation in which an employer
may select a candidate to interview, based on test results only for the interview to
potentially reveal undesired traits. If the test is carried out after the interview and the
candidate is selected for employment based on these results this would essentially
mean that a potentially better employee was discarded due to this selection process.
Moore (2006) appears to share this damning belief by summarising;
“A shared conclusion in the relevant literature is that selection methodology is
unreliable most of the time”
The wording of this statement leaves room for additional research. Moore appears to
suggest that it is not unreliable „all‟ of the time meaning that in some circumstances,
„PPT‟ does, accurately show interviewers the candidate‟s traits.
Due to this high importance, Smith et al (1989) constructed a graph, [Appendix 1],
based on the results of a series of meta-analysis, which ranks the methods in order
of which produces the most accurate prediction of performance. Interestingly, on this
graph, Ability tests are more accurate by approximately 10% than Personality tests
however neither is particularly close to a „perfect prediction‟.
Work earlier carried out by Barrick et al (2001), also revealed a belief that;
“There is no doubt that good psychometric tests are the most effective method
of assessing factors such as personality and intelligence.”
It is important to note a subtle difference in the earlier work where they bring in the
notion of ‘good’ psychometric tests which may be key to providing accurate and
reliable results. In this sense, the literature thus far, appears to suggest that a test
determined to be good, which will yield accurate answers, would be one without
nonsensical questions.
At this stage, the Aston Centre for Human Resources (2008) offers an excellent
summary based on what has been discussed thus far;
“Psychometric testing can be reliable and potentially valid for many roles, but
may only be valid for a restricted range of criterion measures and the overall
7. Student ID: 08006321 Page 7 of 16 C. Shaw
utility of such test may be undermined by the adverse reaction of the
candidates. “
Offering a different alternative, some businesses may use these simply because they
are used to them. Literature suggests these tests potentially save time for
interviewers as the candidate can answer multiple questions on the personality test
which may crop up during the interview stage thus achieving two things with one
action. (Anderson and Witvliet (2008))
This preference is regardless of their reliability or validity, based on familiarity with
the system. McHenry (2001) points out a possible negative impact of this, implying
that organisations may „use and abuse these tests in equal measure‟ as they
become a commodity item available cheaply over the internet.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - [Appendix 2]
From the literature, one of the more popular personality tests is the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator or „MBTI‟ for short. The test is based on the theories of Carl Jung
(1927) and takes approximately twenty minutes to complete. It asks a list of
questions, from which each answer directly relates to one of four possible personality
traits as shown in [Appendix 2].
The instrument dates back approximately thirty years and, according to Cammileri
(2002);
“Its extensive use in industry and various documented studies have shown it
to be valid and reliable”.
With regards to validity, designer, Isabel Briggs Myers (1985) stated that the MBTI
can only be accurate provided the candidate being tested is “honest when self-
reporting”. The 2009 MBTI Manual also claims validity suggesting;
“An instrument is said to be valid when it measures what it has been
designed to measure” (Schaubhut Et al (2009)).
Although the majority of the literature does not seek to contradict such claims, it does
strongly believe that it should not be used where recruitment or selection is involved.
8. Student ID: 08006321 Page 8 of 16 C. Shaw
In a review in 1996, a committee decided that at that moment in time the existing
research did not “justify the use of the MBTI in career counselling programs”
(Nowack (1996)).
Possibly the most crucial and interesting part to this entire debate is summed up the
words of the creators of the MBTI who stress in their guidelines that the MBTI does
not “imply excellence, competence, or natural ability, only what is preferred”. In other
words their tool does not show or „Perfectly predict‟ whether a candidate will be good
at or excel in specific areas, it shows nothing but their own preferences.
Further in the guidelines is a statement which brings in an entirely new angle to this
debate, whether these personality tests are „ethical‟. Specifically the creators state
that;
“It is unethical and in many cases illegal to require job applicants to take
the Indicator if the results will be used to screen out applicants”.
(Myers-Briggs Foundation, Ethical Use Policy)
This leads on to the final research question, where, the literature available suggests
there are a number of underlying ethical issues which, although the BPS exists to
filter out, may survive.
The first example of this appears in the work of Anthony et al (1996) where they
state;
“It is generally agreed that an organisation has the right to know whether an
applicant for a sales position is introverted or extroverted”
Whether or not an organisation has the „right to know‟ personal details like these
could be something of a contentious area. On one hand, for some jobs and roles, i.e.
the example given in this statement, knowing this information is necessary however
this statement suggests that management have a „right to demand‟ this information
regardless of the situation which may be unlawful in the eyes of the British
Psychological Society, (BPS).
9. Student ID: 08006321 Page 9 of 16 C. Shaw
Searle (2003) offers another opinion, declaring Psychometric tests will forever be
open to abuse as they „offer a potential means of legitimizing discrimination by those
in power and authority‟. This belief faces strong disagreement by Hogan et al (1996),
in work carried out 7 years earlier, who states;
“...we want to suggest in the strongest possible terms that the use of well-
constructed personality testing in pre-employment screening will be a force for
equal employment opportunity, social justice, and increased productivity.”
The notion of the tests being „well constructed‟ incorporates correct moderation and
simple questions meaning that candidates face no confusion during the testing
phase. For psychologists, the „BPS‟ has extremely strict views on what is fair,
ethically and morally right for example rule 2.1i states that;
“Psychologists should develop and maintain a comprehensive awareness of
professional ethics, including familiarity with this Code and Recognise that
ethical dilemmas will inevitably arise in the course of professional practice.”
(British Psychological Society (2009))
Conclusion
To summarise the main arguments, „PPT‟ can be reliable and valid if deployed
correctly. Questions must be user-friendly allowing no scope for
confusion/misinterpretation and administered without bias. This should ensure the
test‟s reliability and from an ethical standpoint, the test should not be used as a sole
selection process. This is in order to ensure equal opportunities, supported by the
„BPS‟.
Within this paper, literature surrounding Personality Testing has been reviewed and
an assessment of its effect of employing the „best people for the job‟ has been
constructed, thus fulfilling the aim and objectives. Research questions/further
objectives have also been met as main arguments have been identified along with
any key ethical issues, using an example test to further demonstrate key ideas, in
this case from the creators themselves.
10. Student ID: 08006321 Page 10 of 16 C. Shaw
The main issue writing this report was the amount of irrelevant subject material. I
found that many of the papers were written by concept advocates and only gave one
sided, biased views. The data that was kept was, where possible, contemporary and
from a neutral source. I feel that by doing this, the integrity of the review was kept
enabling for a strictly non-biased conclusion to be formed.
If I were to continue this, I would expand the analysis into different models such as
the „Big 5 Factor Model‟ as I was unable to do it within this review due to word
limitation.
Overall I am satisfied with the review and its findings, answering the question
proposed at the beginning. One recommendation I would make, given the
opportunity, would be to subject a successful business man/women, for example Sir
Richard Branson, to a multitude of the „PPT‟s and have a psychologist analyse the
results to see if he/she possesses perceived qualities desired by interviewers as
defined above. This would effectively prove/disprove the validity argument in
particular.
In conclusion, „PPT‟ will only ever improve the chances of employing the best people
for the job IF used in conjunction with other selection methods. On its own it is
viewed as being ethically wrong and more often than not will yield invalid results due
to candidates undermining the test by providing answers they believe employers will
want to read as opposed to their own personal preference.
Word Count 2,199
11. Student ID: 08006321 Page 11 of 16 C. Shaw
References
Anderson, N. and Witvliet, C. (2008). “Fairness reactions to personnel selection
methods: an international comparison between The Netherlands, the United States,
France, Spain, Portugal, and Singapore”. International Journal of Selection and
Assessment. Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 1-13.
Anthony, W., Perrewe, P. & Kacmar, K. (1996). Strategic Human Resource
Management. 2nd
edition. United States of America: The Dryden Press
Barclay, J. (1999). Improving selection interviews with structure: organisations' use
of "behavioural" interviews. Personnel Review. 30(1). p. 97
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K., Judge, T.A. (2001). "Personality and performance at the
beginning of the new millennium: what do we know and where do we go next?" The
International Journal of Selection and Assessment. Vol. 9 No.1/2, pp.9-30
Beardwell, I., Holden, L. & Claydon, T. (2004). Human Resource Management: A
Contemporary Approach. 4th
edition. Great Britain: Pearson Education Ltd. p.213
Branine, M. (2008). Graduate recruitment and selection in the UK: A study of the
recent changes in methods and expectations. Career Development International.
13(6). p.510
British Psychological Society (2009) Ethical Code of Conduct [Online]. Available
from: http://www.bps.org.uk/document-download-area/document-
download$.cfm?file_uuid=E6917759-9799-434A-F313-9C35698E1864&ext=pdf
[Accessed: 20 April 2011]
12. Student ID: 08006321 Page 12 of 16 C. Shaw
Camilleri, E. (2002). Some atecedents of organisational commitment: results from an
information systems public sector organisation. Bank of Valletta Review. 25(Spring).
p.13
Furr, R.M. and Funder, D.C. (2007). “Behavioral observation”, in Robins, R.W.,
Fraley, R.C. and Krueger, R.F. (Eds), Handbook of Research Methods in Personality
Psychology. Guilford Press. New York, NY.
Hogan, R., Hogan, J. & Roberts, B. (1996). Personality measurement and
employment decisions. American Psychologist. Vol 51. pp. 469-477
Jenkins, A. (2001). Companies‟ Use of Psychometric Testing and the Changing
Demand for Skills: A Review of the Literature. London: Centre for the Economics of
Education. p.31
Laming (1997). Cited in. Searle, R. (2003). Selection & Recruitment: a critical text.
United Kingdom, The Open University: Palgrave Macmillan. pp.2-270
McHenry, R. (2001). "Frames of mind: online psychometrics (panel debate)". People
Management. No.14 June, pp.31
Mick, M. (2010). Et Tu, Brute? Raising Awareness of the Impact of End-user
Personality Types on System Development Success. Proceedings of the Academy
for Studies in Business. 2(1). p. 22
Moore, F. (2006). “Recruitment and selection of international managers”, in Edwards,
T. And Rees, C. (Eds), International Human Resources Management: Globalization,
National Systems and Multinational Companies, Prentice-Hall Financial Times,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 195-215.
13. Student ID: 08006321 Page 13 of 16 C. Shaw
Myers, I. and McCaulley, M. (1985). Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use
of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.2nd ed. Palo Alto. CA: Consulting Psychologists
Press. pp.52-53
Myers-Briggs Foundation (2010). Ethics for Administering [Online]. Available from:
http://www.myersbriggs.org/myers-and-briggs-foundation/ethical-use-of-the-mbti-
instrument/ethics-for-administering.asp [Accessed: 20 April 2011]
Newell, S. (2006). “Selection and assessment”, in Redman, T. and Wilkinson, A,
Contemporary Human Resource Management, Financial Times Prentice-Hall,
Harlow.
Nowack, K. (1996). Is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator the Right Tool to Use?
Performance in Practice. American Society of Training and Development. Autumn
(6).
Oliveira, E. & Proenca, M. (2009). From normative to tacit knowledge: CVs analysis
in personnel selection. Employee Relations. 31(4). pp.427-447
Parkinson, M. (2005). How to master psychometric tests. 4th Edition. London:
Koogan-Page
Roberts, G. (1997). Recruitment and Selection: A competency approach. Great
Britain: Cromwell Press. pp. 13 & 164 – 167
Sackett, P.R. and Lievens, F. (2008). “Personnel selection”. Annual Review of
Psychology. Vol. 59, pp. 419-50.
14. Student ID: 08006321 Page 14 of 16 C. Shaw
Schaubhut, N., Herk, N. and Thompson, R. (2009). "MBTI Form M Manual
Supplement". Consulting Psychologists Press. pp. 17
Searle, R. (2003). Selection & Recruitment: a critical text. United Kingdom, The
Open University: Palgrave Macmillan. pp.2-270
Smith, M., Gregg, M. And Andrews, D. (1989). Selection and Assessment: a new
appraisal. London:Pitman. Cited in Searle, R. (2003). Selection & Recruitment: a
critical text. United Kingdom, The Open University: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 255
The Aston Centre for Human Resources. (2008). Strategic Human Resource
Management: Building research-based practice. London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel Development. p.110.
15. Student ID: 08006321 Page 15 of 16 C. Shaw
Appendix 1 - Accuracy of Some Methods of Selection
Smith, M., Gregg, M. And Andrews, D. (1989). Selection and Assessment: a new appraisal.
London:Pitman. Cited in Searle, R. (2003). Selection & Recruitment: a critical text. United Kingdom,
The Open University: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 255
The graph above represents the results of a meta-analysis of different selection
methods in regards to their ability to predict the relative performance of an
employee.
A score of 1 predicts the relative performance with perfect accuracy, a score of 0.5
yields a prediction of 50% accuracy whereas a score of 0 or lower is effectively the
equivalent of an employer picking candidates at random leaving everything to
‘chance’.
16. Student ID: 08006321 Page 16 of 16 C. Shaw
Appendix 2 - Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator
The picture on the right
displays the 16 possible
types as defined by the
MBTI above.