|
Nov 15, 2014, 01:32 PM
|
 |
Desert Kitty hates titles
|
|
Member Since: Jul 2008
Location: TARDIS
Posts: 12,954
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigblackdog
For crying out loud. If you can't assess someone for a job through normal channels, like a EEOC compliant job app or resume, references, interviews and maybe a JOB-SPECIFIC test, you should not be hiring.
The best criteria after basic competencies in a job, believe it or not, is team-fit. You could hire the Nobel Plumbing Prize Winner and if he pisses everyone off, it's not a good fit. The best thing to do is have everyone that will work with the person interview them. Then hire as a team. That way, no one can complain about the new guy because everyone hired him.
Besides most companied that use intelligence/personality tests are NOT QUALIFIED to interpret the results. The ones that are are usually law enforcement, military and DoD jobs.
|
I agree!  I once worked for a company where they randomly picked one of us to do a third interview with a candidate. It would be 3 or 4 people at the most, and HR gave us a list of questions to ask the person. They were mostly more BS interview questions, but you could pick any question YOU want to ask.
Then, after that interview, the manager would ask each of us (privately) if we thought this person would fit in. I don't know how much our input mattered, but the fact that they did it all says a little something about their thinking.
Alas, if only ALL employers would think this way. It's true that someone can have all the perfect skills/degree/experience, but if she/he is a ***hole, then it's not going to work. 
Personality/psychological tests are a waste of time, both for the applicant and company. But somebody thought it was a good idea.....And tests don't reveal the person anyway. You have to meet them and work with them. Why should they care if I think politicians lie?
|