Managerial selection, psychological testing

Would you feel confident that auto-generated reports provide a sufficient and accurate picture of who you really are as a person?

 

The question is, of course, rhetorical. But since the industry currently is moving towards more automated assessments, I want to mention three reasons for carrying out the personal meeting. Firstly, without a meeting, how could I as a psychologist deliver a qualified assessment? Secondly, I always strive for providing the kind of exciting and useful learning experience I myself once got. Thirdly, candidates are actively involved in a hypothesis-testing dialogue as opposed to being told who they “are.”

​

Apart from the dialogue leading to more accurate assessments, candidates feel they are being assessed fairly. I'd like to think that you appreciate how this process ensures your employer brand.

 

Would you like to know more?

If you are a manager, then just like me you may have undergone a personal assessment with psychological testing and can relate to what it is like to be a candidate.

​

My personal most rewarding candidate experience occurred back in the 90's where I met a psychologist who discussed my test results with me. I discovered that for the first time in my life, I could talk about personal areas of development without offering up endless justification. Instead, it turned into a learning experience and I left the meeting energised.

 

I have heard contrasting stories from business acquaintances who have applied for top executive positions. Before meeting anyone from the potential employer, they have been asked to complete ability and personality tests online. Upon completion, they have received feedback in the form of automated reports. In other words, they were not offered a thorough discussion with a psychologist. In spite of that, in some cases the reports were followed by a
“thanks, but no thanks.”