A clip featuring comedian Chris Rock that went viral last year sums up the issue of high-stakes hiring. Skewering the “few bad apples” phrase often applied to policing in the United States, he riffs:

            “Bad apples? Some jobs can’t have bad apples. Some jobs, everybody gotta be good. Like … pilots! American Airlines can’t be like, ‘Most of our pilots like to land. We just got a few bad apples that like to crash into mountains. Please bear with us.’”¹

Rock’s bit on the unforgiving nature of high-stakes hiring is spot-on. Medical professionals, first responders, pilots, military personnel, and people in other potentially risky occupations have little room for error. A slip of the scalpel or a miscalculated military directive could easily result in the loss of human life. And just as precision is required of those who enter high-stakes professions, it is also required of the talent acquisition processes that fill these roles.   

High-Stakes Hiring Depends on Data

Those who manage high-stakes hiring processes know that even the most competent candidates have weaknesses — the highly qualified are still human, after all. Problems arise when a candidate’s shortcomings conflict with the demands of the job. Using personality tests in talent acquisition processes can help identify a candidate’s possible weaknesses up front. This allows hiring managers to determine whether a person’s possible shortcomings represent an area for development or a potential liability.

To avoid headline-making accidents, employers should focus on crafting a hiring process that uses multiple evaluation methods — for example, interviews and personality tests. When interviews are used as the primary hiring method, incompetent hires are less likely to be detected. An objective measure of personality, though, can provide insights that cannot be gleaned from interviews.

The Consequences of High-Stakes Hiring

So, what behaviors might indicate incompetence for a high-stakes hire? Our database of global personality research shows that individuals who are prone to fail in high-risk occupations tend to be described as inattentive to detail, unreliable at rule following, susceptible to stress, ineffective at working with others, and overly concerned with being the center of attention. When a candidate exhibits one or more of these behaviors, safety should be a concern. Lives may even be at risk.

The Costa Concordia cruise ship accident is just one regrettable example of lethal misalignment between role and individual. On January 13, 2012, Captain Francesco Schettino turned off the ship’s warning systems because he felt confident that he knew the Italian coast well enough. Captain Schettino overestimated his capabilities. A coastal reef tore a 50-meter gash in the ship’s side, tragically killing 32 passengers. Captain Schettino was later convicted of manslaughter, and it is a shame that his negligent behaviors were not flagged during his former organization’s hiring process.

Hiring processes should prioritize candidates who are trainable, compliant, strong, poised, vigilant, and cautious. Well-validated personality tests can identify these qualities, so hiring managers can weigh them against an individual’s weaknesses. Captain Chesley B. Sullenberger III, also known as Sully, is an example of a successful high-stakes hire. On January 15, 2009, Captain Sullenberger was piloting U.S. Airways flight 1549 when both of the engines ceased to work. Captain Sullenberger was able to save the day by safely maneuvering the plane to land on the Hudson River near New York City.

Captain Sullenberger’s disposition played a big role in averting disaster. His subordinates described him as calm, cool, and collected during the ordeal. Hiring managers who are seeking to fill positions with a high risk of accidents should focus on finding people with qualities like those of Captain Sullenberger — people who can competently stand at the helm if (or when) catastrophe strikes.  

Personality and Accident Prevention

Research shows that making hiring processes longer will not safeguard against bad hires. Incorporating well-validated personality tests, however, can make interview processes more comprehensive while shortening their length.

At Hogan, we’ve seen this firsthand. We once worked with a large metropolitan transportation company with the objective of using personality to reduce bus accidents. Employees hired using Hogan’s Safety solution were more safety-conscious. They had 40% fewer rule violations, 25% fewer workers’ compensation claims, and 20% fewer accidents.

In another instance, we worked with a U.S. plastic tube manufacturing company that was struggling with an increasing number of accidents and injuries. After the company introduced personality tests into its selection efforts, the accident rate was reduced to zero within two years, and the company received the maximum reduction in fines from past OSHA audits.

In some industries, the quality of the talent acquisition process can literally decide the fate of others’ lives. In more mundane circumstances, it can decide who fills key roles that are responsible for keeping the organization afloat. Regardless, no employer can afford to let bad hires spoil their organization.

References

1. Diamond, J. (2020, June 5). Some Jobs Can’t Have Bad Apples. Medium. https://medium.com/@julie_diamond/some-jobs-cant-have-bad-apples-4c7d927f7f3b

To say the current talent market is competitive might be an understatement. Concerns about the skills gap have intensified as the number of open jobs in the United States has grown considerably in the past year and a half. Job openings hovered around 7 million before the COVID-19 pandemic, rose to 9 million by April 2021, and then climbed to 10.9 million by the end of July 2021.^1–3 Meanwhile, the unemployment rate has also risen, and many workers have been unable to find new work due to skill misalignment with the available openings, concern for their health, issues with childcare, distance from opportunities, and more.^2,4 In other words, jobs are opening, the size of the talent pool is shrinking, and the skills that were in-demand pre-pandemic are even more so now.

For many employers, finding the right people to hire right now may seem near impossible. There are numerous ways organizations can improve their talent management strategies to not only hire but also retain top talent. One in particular entered the spotlight this summer when a LinkedIn post went viral: cutting back on interviews to reduce time to hire and gain candidates’ loyalty. Interview fatigue is a critical flaw in the candidate experience at many organizations — and thus an insidious threat to your talent acquisition strategy.

Interview Fatigue: The Case of Mike Conley

Mike Conley was interviewing for a job at an organization that seemed like the perfect fit. He was interested in the role, the company’s mission was one he could get behind, and the pay and benefits were generous. The only problem? They expected him to participate in nine interviews.

Anguished by interview fatigue, Mr. Conley withdrew his name from the candidate pool and hopped on LinkedIn to vent his frustration about how the number of interviews for senior-level executive jobs have continued to increase in length.⁶ He surmised that employers’ fear of picking the wrong candidate wastes more time than is necessary; he suggested contract-to-hire or other forms of trial periods could be an antidote to hesitation during the hiring decision.⁶ Warning employers that the number of interviews can make competitive candidates look elsewhere, he ended his post with a declaration: “With this withdrawal, I make a stand. A stand against never-ending interviews. A stand for job hunters.”⁶

Far from a shout into the abyss, Mr. Conley’s post turned out to be something of a Martin Luther moment, a Ninety-five Theses for interview fatigue. Covered by news outlets such as Forbes and the BBC, his plea for shorter interviews went viral with more than 1.9 million views.⁶

Other professionals, from entry level to executive, chimed in with support and commiseration about interview fatigue. One commenter cheekily suggested that, after the fifth interview, employers should start paying candidates for their time.⁶ Another commenter suggested the conversation would be more productive if companies guilty of lengthy interviews were tagged directly in the thread.⁶ Yet another commenter, who once went through an 11-step interview process only to hear that the position was postponed, suggested that never-ending interviews were a sign that employers were unclear on what they needed or weren’t empowered to make decisions.⁶ The top commenter, who shared that they had a four-month series of interviews only to lose the position to an internal candidate, stated, “Mike, I share your frustration and applaud your decision.”⁶

Mr. Conley’s complaint exposed interview fatigue to be a common flaw in the overall candidate experience. Fortunately, his story has a happy ending. An employer saw his LinkedIn post and liked his enthusiasm for efficiency. After a number of job interviews he considered appropriate, Mr. Conley is now happily employed as a VP of software engineering.⁶

How Many Interviews Are Too Many Interviews?

Like most things in business, there is no magic number of interviews — it depends on the organization. Nonetheless, four appears to be an important threshold for both employers and candidates to avoid interview fatigue.

Google, where candidates were formerly subjected to more than a dozen interviews, has become a trailblazer in interview efficiency.⁷ Google’s research found that after the fourth interview, interviewers had 86% confidence in the candidate.⁷ Afterward, confidence rose by less than 1% with each additional interview.⁷ Furthermore, 94% of the time, the hiring decision remained the same whether the candidates were interviewed four times or 12 times.⁷

This research suggests that exceeding four interviews is likely to lead to interview fatigue. Google learned from these findings and now follows the “rule of four” for interviews, only passing this benchmark on rare occasions.⁷

But What If We Make a Bad Hire?

A common reason employers conduct excessive interviews is to avoid making a bad hire. And understandably so — even many of the professionals who agreed with Mr. Conley’s lament conceded that avoiding bad hires is important for company survival. Employees who are onboarded and are unsuccessful in their roles can spread disengagement like contagion, and turnover costs an average of one-half to two times an employee’s salary (and this is a conservative estimate).⁸ Still, as LinkedIn’s zeitgeist and Google’s research reveals, overreliance on interviews will not shield employers from the danger of making a bad hire and will instead contribute to interview fatigue and inefficiency.   

The good news is that interviews can be supplemented with another powerful tool for talent acquisition: personality tests. While it is well documented that interviews have low predictive validity, a well-validated personality test can predict how a candidate is likely to perform in a given role, uncovering truths about a candidate that interviews can’t. In this way, using personality tests in interviews can help employers avoid making bad hires by ensuring that the ultimate hiring decision is backed up by data. These insights are useful because, no matter the number of interviews, candidates will likely be self-conscious and intentional about only highlighting their strengths to potential employers. Let’s be honest — how many candidates do you think speak candidly about their weaknesses? Personality data can give hiring managers objective insight into a candidate’s values, strengths, and weaknesses and biases to help them make a sound hiring decision.

A Faster Way to Make a Good Hire

Employers who wish to take an even more tailored approach to finding the right person for a particular job can go a step further by establishing a custom personality profile. Using a custom personality profile in candidate selection allows hiring managers to identify the candidates who most align with their needs and avoid spending valuable interview time with people who are less aligned with the job requirements or organizational culture.

Not to mention, personality data is proven to reduce the number of necessary interviews, cutting the interview-to-hire ratio by as much as 50%.⁹ Gathering personality data before meeting a candidate lets hiring managers prepare to ask insightful questions, resulting in more informative and efficient interviews. Aside from helping produce a more educated hiring decision, this refinement of the interview process also allows organizations to reduce their time to hire, resulting in a better candidate experience and reduced likelihood of interview fatigue. In a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous talent market like the one we currently find ourselves in, employers who consider the quality of the candidate experience they create will come out on top.

Unfortunately, the talent shortage is expected to worsen even more in the coming years, and a staggering 70% of organizations are not prepared to meet their future talent needs.¹⁰ Beyond talent acquisition and retention, understanding the role of candidate experience in talent attraction is critical in the competition for top talent, especially when it comes to finding effective workers with the most in-demand skills, such as analytics, communication, and adaptability.¹⁰ Key to thriving in the current talent market, personality tests provide organizations with a clear picture of how candidates will perform in a given role without causing interview fatigue (or potentially drawing the ire of LinkedIn users).

References

1. Rugaber, C. (2021, April 6). U.S. Job Openings in February Reached Highest Rate on Record. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/health-coronavirus-pandemic-794433b39420f41763ddb0803e1f7ca9
2. Sanandaji, T., Monte, F., Ham, A., & Tarki, A. (2021, June 14). Attracting Talent During a Worker Shortage. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/06/attracting-talent-during-a-worker-shortage
3. Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. Department of Labor. (2021, August). Job Openings and Labor Turnover Summary [Press release]. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.nr0.htm
4. Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. Department of Labor. (2021, April 22). Unemployment Rates Up in 40 States and D.C. from March 2020 to March 2021. The Economics Daily. https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2021/unemployment-rates-up-in-40-states-and-d-c-from-march-2020-to-march-2021.htm
5. Morath, E. (2021, May 6). Millions Are Unemployed. Why Can’t Companies Find Workers? The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/millions-are-unemployed-why-cant-companies-find-workers-11620302440
6. Conley, M. (2021, June). Today I Pulled My Name for Consideration for a Company I Was Interviewing with. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mike-t-conley_jobhunt2021-leadership-servantleadership-activity-6812003946253705217-VF5t/
7. Shaper, S. (2017, April 4). How Many Interviews Does It Take to Hire a Googler? re:Work. https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/google-rule-of-four/
8. McFeely, S., & Wigert, B. (2019, March 13). The Fixable Problem Costs U.S. Businesses $1 Trillion. Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/247391/fixable-problem-costs-businesses-trillion.aspx
9. Hardy, J. H. III, Gibson, C., Sloan, M., & Carr, A. (2017). Are Applicants More Likely to Quit Longer Assessments? Examining the Effect of Assessment Length on Applicant Attrition Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1148-1158. https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fapl0000213
10. Kavanaugh, J., & Lakshmi, P. M. (2019). Talent Radar: How the Best Companies Get the Skills They Need to Thrive in the Digital Era. Infosys Knowledge Institute. https://www.infosys.com/navigate-your-next/research/talent-radar.html

Between closures, downsizing, and lost revenue, the COVID-19 pandemic has devastated the retail industry, hastening the ongoing retail apocalypse. In April 2020 the industry’s employment level hit a record low for the first time since December 2009.¹ Since April 2020, employment rates have increased drastically, reaching 41,100 jobs added in February 2021.² However, even as more jobs are added, many businesses continue to downsize or close. In 2020, a record number of major chains closed, resulting in the highest vacancy rate since 2015 and the first drop in retail rent for the first time in nine years.³ As of March, more than 1,000 stores had already closed in 2021, with about 9,000 more expected to close by year-end.⁴

As brick-and-mortar stores diminished in number, e-commerce sales grew to $861.12 billion in 2020, an amount that was not expected until 2022.⁵ With the dramatic shift toward e-commerce come new forecasted trends, such as livestreaming (e.g., try-on sessions), robotics technology (e.g., food delivery robots), new purposes for malls (e.g., microfulfillment centers), and virtual fitting rooms.⁶

As consumer shopping preferences and industry trends change, organizations will need leaders who are agile, adaptable, and open to the changes. If an organization cannot keep up with these accelerated changes, the organization may very well find itself a statistic. Reliable and well-validated personality assessments can help organizations develop their existing leaders by identifying the strengths and weaknesses that will allow them to meet consumer demands and keep up with trends. Using personality, Hogan can also help organizations select leaders who can easily pivot to stay ahead of the industry changes.

While the retail industry is in such flux, organizations can’t afford to lose customers by hiring people who provide poor customer service — whether due to having a poor temperament, being inactively helpful, or demonstrating low self-awareness. In fact, 65% of customers end their relationship with a business and switch to a different brand after experiencing poor customer service.⁷ Worse, acquiring new customers can cost five times as much as it does to retain existing customers.⁸ Using personality assessment, organizations can select applicants who will excel in areas such as customer service or sales. Hogan can help organizations identify which candidates will maintain a positive temperament, help customers actively, be strategically self-aware, and ultimately, keep customers satisfied. 

Hogan has helped numerous companies in the retail industry improve their selection of well-qualified candidates and their leadership development initiatives. For example, a global retailer increased sales by 61%after implementing Hogan’s solutions into its selection procedures. The following case study explains how.

Case Study: Increasing Annual Sales by 61%

The global retailer, which specializes in high-quality fashion and homeware, approached ThreeFish Consulting, an authorized distributor of Hogan’s assessments in India, for help in identifying talent for the role of store manager. After developing an understanding of the retailer’s needs, ThreeFish recommended a custom personality assessment solution from Hogan. While Hogan does offer prevalidated, off-the-shelf personality solutions, this retail company was growing rapidly and needed an individualized solution.

The research process to create the custom profile involved several steps. Hogan started with a job analysis to better understand the critical job requirements for store managers at this retail company. The job analysis allowed ThreeFish to identify key traits of store managers who would excel in the position and support the company’s continued growth. Next, Hogan and ThreeFish collected performance data for current store managers through a criterion-related validity study. Hogan analyzed validity evidence for the store manager position, comparing successful store managers from similar companies in the retail industry. Through this step, Hogan found a significant relationship between personality and performance in the store manager job.

By going through these steps of collecting validity evidence and performance data, Hogan was able to create a personality profile to identify store managers who would be responsible and honest, drive results and sales, encourage customer loyalty, and lead others effectively.

The global retailer wanted to ensure a strong return on investment by implementing the custom personality profile in selection procedures. Based on the criterion evidence, store managers who fit the profile were rated five times greater on overall effectiveness and other critical competencies than store managers who did not fit the profile. Additionally, store managers who fit the custom profile received higher store performance ratings.

With more effective store managers in place, the global retailer can improve the bottom line of its stores. Hogan’s research indicates an annual sales increase of 61% as a result of using the profile to select store managers. This increase in sales translates to millions of dollars in revenue.

This is just one of many success stories demonstrating how Hogan has helped companies in the retail industry improve. For decades, Hogan has collected performance data from millions of working adults to help select higher-performing candidates for all kinds of jobs, ultimately helping clients realize strong returns on their investments. Investing in selection and development tools that have been backed by scientific rigor can help retailers avoid being part of the retail apocalypse “death” count. As the retail industry shifts and new skills are required, finding the right and best candidates is critical not just to survive but thrive.

Download our Retail Industry Spotlight to learn more about how Hogan helps retail organizations improve their talent strategies.

References

1. Statista (2021, March). Monthly Employment in the Retail Industry in the United States from 2009 to 2021. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1081368/monthly-retail-employment-us/
2. Franck, T. (2021, March 5). Here’s Where the Jobs Are – in One Chart. CNBC EVOLVE. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/where-the-jobs-are-february-2021-chart.html
3. Cheng, A. (2021, January 13). U.S. 2021 Retail Vacancy Rate May Rise to 7-Year High After Record Store Closings. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/andriacheng/2021/01/13/us-2021-retail-vacancy-rate-may-rise-to-7-year-high-after-record-store-closings/?sh=12da310668e8
4. Meisenzahl, M. (2021, March 17). More Than 1000 Stores Are Closing in 2021 as the Retail Apocalypse Drags On. Here’s the Full List. Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/stores-closing-in-2021-list-2021-3
5. Ali, F. (2021, January 29). US Ecommerce Grows 44.0% in 2020. Digital Commerce 360. https://www.digitalcommerce360.com/article/us-ecommerce-sales/
6. Reda, S. (2020, December 2). Retail in 2021: What Will Endure and What’s Going to Change? National Retail Federation.https://nrf.com/blog/retail-2021-what-will-endure-and-whats-going-change
7. Harold, F. (2021, May 25). Must-know Customer Service Statistics of 2021 (So Far). Khoros. https://khoros.com/blog/must-know-customer-service-statistics
8. Landis, T. (2021, April 20). Customer Retention Marketing vs. Customer Acquisition Marketing. Outbound Engine. https://www.outboundengine.com/blog/customer-retention-marketing-vs-customer-acquisition-marketing/

Few of us are immune to the charms of charisma. Research even suggests that our biology may cause us to prefer individuals who project a confident social presence, strong vision, and high risk tolerance.¹

Therefore, it is unsurprising that charismatic candidates often seem like irresistible additions to the office. While other candidates might begin to blur together amid a monotonous talent acquisition process, charismatic candidates tend to make memorable impressions and seem unusually engaging.

But before becoming too smitten with these charming individuals, employers should do their due diligence. By administering personality assessments before interviews, employers can learn to spot the signs of a charismatic job candidate before they even enter the interview room. Reviewing a candidate’s personality assessment results beforehand will help employers replace their rose-colored glasses with a more realistic view of charisma in job candidates. And here are four reasons why that matters.

Charisma is quantifiable.

Far from the eye of the beholder, charisma is a tangible characteristic that the Hogan Development Survey (HDS), a personality inventory designed specifically for the workplace, can measure. Participants are considered charismatic if they receive elevated scores on the Bold, Colorful, Mischievous, and Imaginative scales. They often demonstrate their charisma to others through their self-confidence, dramatic flair, readiness to test the limits, and visionary thinking. Using assessments can help employers know in advance if they are dealing with a charismatic candidate so that they can be mindful of bias in interviews.

Outside of an assessment setting, it is possible to make educated guesses about who is charismatic and who is not (although guesswork is no replacement for using personality assessments with interviews). For example, most modern U.S. presidents would probably score high on the charisma cluster because star power is a necessary skill for camera-heavy elections.² Some of the earlier presidents — most notably James Madison, who was by most accounts a frail and painfully shy scholar — were less likely to be charismatic.

Imagine if Madison, the sheepish father of the Constitution, had run against a powerhouse opponent such as John F. Kennedy, the coiffed and flirtatious king of Camelot. During a debate, Madison might have stumbled over his words and undersold his achievements while Kennedy might have boasted with eloquence and strived for a connection with the audience. Who do you think would have gotten the job? Organizations that opt to use assessment in interviews can avoid giving an unfair advantage to candidates with charismatic edge to ensure that they are not overlooking equally (or more) effective individuals.

Want to learn more about hiring the right way? Check out our guide to crafting next-level talent identification, interviewing, and selection processes

Charisma is hard work.

People who lack charisma often wonder how others pull it off. The answer? Being well liked can be a full-time job. Emergent, or charismatic, individuals spend a lot of time displaying their likability to others. This dedication to being noticeable often pays off well because organizations tend to promote people who look like they are doing a good job. Effective individuals occupy the other end of the spectrum. These folks are operational. That means they spend most of their time and energy focusing on their day-to-day tasks, rather than their popularity. Although this diligence is good for the overall organization, it often comes at the cost of career advancement. Employers should think about whether the role in question will require strategic, big-picture thinking or more operational behavior.

Of course, the emergent-effective paradigm occurs on a spectrum. At one end are those who are excellent self-promoters, and on the other are those who are extremely humble. Consider Elon Musk, the CEO for Tesla and social media mainstay (for better or for worse), who is so charismatic that he is now crossing over into the entertainment industry. Now compare camera-ready Musk with Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO for Facebook, who has a reputation for being awkward and emotionless (anyone remember his reptilian performance at the congressional hearing?).³ The difference between the two executives probably comes down to the fact that Musk spends a lot of time on image-management, whereas Zuckerberg tends to prefer a more behind-the-scenes role.

Contrary to emergence, effectiveness is harder to see in an interview. Not to mention, charisma or lack thereof is never the only factor predictive of success in any given job role. Using assessments in interviews can help hiring managers pinpoint where exactly a candidate is on the effective-emergent spectrum to ensure they hire the person who is best suited to do the job.

Too much charisma isn’t a good thing.

Although social media and the antics of headline-making billionaires may tell us differently, being exceptionally charismatic is not always a path to success. In their analysis of charisma, Vergauwe, Wille, Hofmans, Kaiser, and De Fruyt found that charisma is associated with overconfidence.⁴ HDS charisma scores significantly predicted self-rated effectiveness (r = .29), but were uncorrelated with coworker-rated effectiveness. Most strikingly, leaders who scored in the 70th percentile on the charisma cluster tended to rate themselves as highly effective, yet coworkers consistently described them as arrogant, reckless, melodramatic, and grandiose.

A fantastic example of extreme charisma in the business world can be found in Adam Neumann.⁵ At first, his audacious, self-assured promotion of WeWork, a “physical social media network,” attracted top talent, drew billions in investments, and led to rapid international expansion. Despite Neumann’s personal magnetism, his approach eventually began to drag down the company. It is well documented that he fostered a toxic work culture of narcissism, harassment, and substance abuse.⁵ In the end, the extreme charisma that fueled his success eventually led to him being ousted by the board, with one of the executives comparing working with him to “babysitting a pyromaniac.”⁶ Using assessments in interviews can help hiring managers ensure they don’t become spellbound by someone with extreme charisma.

Charisma is not all bad.

As in most other areas of life, moderation is key. Individuals with above-average scores on the charisma cluster often excel in their roles and organizations. According to coworkers, a slight elevation on the charisma cluster — neither too little nor too much—predicts the highest levels of rated effectiveness. In fact, Vergauwe, Wille, Hofmans, Kaiser, and De Fruyt found a significant curvilinear relationship between HDS charisma scores and coworker-rated effectiveness.⁴ Moderately charismatic leaders inspire their teams to rally around a vision and work hard; moderately charismatic employees draw in clients and boost visibility for specific projects. Using assessments in interviews can help employers gauge whether a candidate’s charisma cluster scores fall into a sweet spot.

With interviews and personality assessment results at their disposal, employers can easily put a candidate’s charisma into the context of the role and organization in question. Employers should also keep in mind that charisma is one of many personality variables, and context really does matter. Some jobs and organizational cultures require more emergent employees, while others require more effective ones. Most roles require people to strike a balance between these two extremes.

References

1. Gordon, I. (2020, September 22). Is There a Biological Basis for Charismatic Leadership? Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-biology-bonding/202009/is-there-biological-basis-charismatic-leadership

2. Spiegal, A. (2012, October 23). Charming, Cold: Does Presidential Personality Matter? [Radio broadcast]. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2012/10/23/163487916/charming-cold-does-presidential-personality-matter

3. Washington Post. (2018, April 10). 5 Awkward Moments at the Facebook Hearing [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuPABtlr-rM

4. Vergauwe, J., Wille, B., Hofmans, J., Kaiser, R. B., & De Fruyt, F. (2018). The Double-edged Sword of Leader Charisma: Understanding the Curvilinear Relationship Between Charismatic Personality and Leader Effectiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(1), 110-130. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000147

5. Brown, E. (2019, September 18). How Adam Neumann’s Over-the-Top Style Built WeWork. ‘This Is Not the Way Everybody Behaves.’ The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-is-not-the-way-everybody-behaves-how-adam-neumanns-over-the-top-style-built-wework-11568823827

6. Duhigg, C. (2020, November 23). How Venture Capitalists Are Deforming Capitalism. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/11/30/how-venture-capitalists-are-deforming-capitalism

First impressions are undoubtedly important in the business world. But to what extent do the importance of first impressions extend to the job candidate experience? Should creating a positive candidate experience be a priority? Candidates are supposed to be the ones impressing you, right?

Rather than leave this question to speculation, we sent out a global candidate experience survey. All 2,000 of our survey respondents were job candidates within three months before completing our survey. We asked candidates what a positive candidate experience means to them and if their candidate experience influenced their decision to move forward or pass on prospective positions.

Respondents replied to our survey with some decisive answers about the hiring process. A whopping 75% of respondents take their candidate experience into account when deciding whether or not they will accept a company’s offer. On the other end of the spectrum, only 7% of job seekers said the hiring process does not affect whether or not they view a company positively. Based on this data, we can unequivocally say that first impressions do matter. Candidates clearly take a company’s candidate experience to reflect its overall employee experience and organizational culture.

These findings mean that the risk of losing applicants due to a noncompetitive candidate experience is real. If the best applicants go elsewhere and the quality of the candidate pool drops, even the best selection tools will not be of much use.

If you want a high caliber of candidates in your hiring pool, then you need to carefully manage the first impression your company makes. A candidate experience audit is the perfect opportunity for your company to take charge of its reputation among job candidates and their social networks.

Our survey data show that personality tests should be at the top of your to-do list during this audit. They help with creating a positive candidate experience, which attracts and maintains candidate interest in your company. Here are four reasons why personality tests boost the overall candidate experience.

1) Personality tests give the candidate experience a cutting-edge feel.

The business environment is increasingly vulnerable to new technologies.  When job searching, candidates are well aware of how quickly emerging technologies can transform their professions.  Competitive candidates look for companies that are on the forefront of innovation in their respective industries and that will keep them up to speed professionally. Candidates’ forward-thinking attitudes means that a positive candidate experience increasingly depends on how tech-savvy they perceive a company to be.

A company’s reputation for innovation starts with the hiring process. Our survey data shows that personality tests imbue the hiring process with a modern feel. Nearly 60% of candidates describe personality tests as state-of-the-art and professional, 58% say they are creative, and 53% characterize them as scientific and serious. By extension, candidates who undergo personality testing will also view their candidate experience as state-of-the-art, professional, creative, scientific, and serious.

2) Personality tests will not deter applicants.

Although candidates are impressed by personality tests, some employers may fear that the time they add to the hiring process will deter candidates. Surprisingly, our data show that the candidate experience is not negatively influenced by adding assessment to the hiring process as an additional requirement.

The majority of candidates, nearly 60%, would not stop applying for a job because of an assessment requirement. Not to mention, research indicates that those who decide to drop out during the assessment process are unlikely to be your strongest candidates anyway.¹

Research shows that assessment length is not much of a deterrent either. According to the decreasing risk model, candidates are most likely to quit an assessment right after its start, and then the dropout rate rapidly decreases thereafter.¹ As a consequence, the difference in candidate experience between long and short assessments is likely minimal.

In fact, more than 70% of candidates do not place importance on a quick application process. Our survey data shows that the majority of job seekers are actually more interested in longer assessments. They see lengthier assessments as an opportunity to perform and as an indication that the company is serious about their application.¹  

3) Fairness of personality tests boosts the overall candidate experience.

What do candidates say is most important to them during the hiring process? First and foremost, 73% of candidates said that they most value a fair application process. The next most important thing to candidates (67%) is that the most qualified applicant gets the position.

Integrity appears to be the consistent element of positive candidate experiences; job seekers want the hiring process to be fair and for evaluation methods to provide the best representation of their candidacy. These two factors were ranked well above the process being fun or fast.

Candidates’ focus on fairness explains why they prefer personality tests to other hiring methods. The predictive power of personality testing ensures that the hiring process is equitable and objective. Well-validated personality tests accurately predict how well someone is likely to perform on the job with no meaningful score differences across protected groups.In contrast, what elements of the hiring process create a negative candidate experience? Slow responsiveness to applications leads to a negative experience for 26% of candidates. Another 26% of candidates said they have a negative perception of companies that do not handle offers and rejections with sensitivity.

It is clear that, in addition to treating applicants fairly, creating a positive candidate experience also means treating applicants with respect.

4) Creating a positive candidate experience is not all about fun and games.

A trend in talent acquisition is to use game-based assessments, which measure candidate attributes through gamified problem-solving. Traditional assessments, on the other hand, feature a standard questionnaire to measure personality, behaviors, or cognitive abilities.

At first, games may seem like an easy solution for creating a positive candidate experience. Games are less tedious than traditional assessments and thus should be enjoyable for job seekers. But there is a problem with this line of reasoning. Our survey data show that 69% of candidates do not place importance on the application process being fun. As we know, candidates prefer fairness in the hiring process and nearly two-thirds of respondents think traditional assessments are fairer than game-based assessments.

Similarly, 60% of candidates believe that traditional assessments represent their qualities as a candidate better than game-based assessments. More than half actually prefer a traditional assessment style to games.            

Altogether, these results indicate that candidates are not concerned with being entertained during the application process. In fact, they overwhelmingly prefer assessments that relate to the job at hand, provide instant feedback, and allow them to accurately represent themselves as candidates.

Conclusion

The goal of the candidate experience is to leave all candidates with a positive view of the company, regardless of the hiring decision. Companies that are already using personality tests for selection can rest assured that they are doing the right thing and that candidates consider it to be mutually beneficial. Meanwhile, companies that have not yet delved into using personality tests for hiring purposes should reserve a spot for it in their next candidate experience audit. These tests are meant to ensure that those selected from the hiring pool reflect what is best for the company.

Want to learn more about crafting a positive candidate experience? Check out our complete candidate experience survey insights!

Reference

¹Hardy, J. H. III, Gibson, C., Sloan, M., & Carr, A. (2017). Are applicants more likely to quit longer assessments? Examining the effect of assessment length on applicant attrition behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1148–1158. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000213

Companies express their guiding principles most clearly during the employee selection process. For instance, employers that value the old adage of “not judging a book by its cover” tend to adopt equitable employee selection procedures. While the specifics of employee selection processes vary, using a universal employability framework will ensure that your organization takes a grounded approach to judging candidates, whether for entry-level or C-suite positions.¹ The three universal competencies that orient an employee selection process are people skills, learning skills, and work ethic. Pursuing candidates with these competencies will strengthen any organization and guard against hiring employees with poor problem-solving, self-management, and interpersonal skills.

People Skills: Can This Person Get Along with Others?

People are social creatures, which means hiring managers should consider a fundamentally human question during employee selection: will this candidate be rewarding to work and spend time with? Although this question is simple, it is often overlooked. Employers are often enticed by bright candidates. But when these people are incapable of getting along with others, or at least unwilling, they tend to erode organizational morale.  

Tech guru Steve Jobs is a great example of someone who, despite being admired for his intelligence and creativity, was emotionally taxing to work with.² His inability to get along with others was apparent from the start of his career. During his stint at Atari, his employers assigned him to the solitary night shift so he would stop upsetting his coworkers. Atari cofounder Nolan Bushnell later said that Jobs “was very often the smartest guy in the room, and he would let people know that.”³ Jobs was suspicious, argumentative, entitled, impulsive, prone to setting impossible standards, and emotionally volatile. He did not value people skills, which curbed his ability to get along with people throughout the ranks. Workers at Pixar and Apple both admitted that working with Jobs required inhabiting an almost egoless state because they were subject to constant abuse and expected to be extremely deferential. Although his genius made him successful, his harsh behavior prevented him from becoming CEO at Apple and eventually resulted in his ousting from the company.

Organizations may clamor to have a genius in their ranks, but focusing on candidates with strong people skills is more beneficial. The majority of today’s leaders are people leaders managing employees with team-based jobs.⁴ When folks who occupy these leadership positions lack the necessary people skills, productivity can plummet. For the sake of those already working within the organization, employers should ensure their employee selection processes place people skills at the heart of the search.

Learning Skills: Can This Person Do the Job?

The accelerated development of new technologies means professionals must pursue education to improve at their jobs and adapt to the business world’s ever-shifting terrain. Hiring managers should look for candidates who display, in addition to occupational expertise, a high degree of inquisitiveness and a propensity for learning. Even at the C-suite level, learning skills should not be taken for granted. As Steven Berglas, PhD, points out in The Perils of Accentuating the Positive, “super smart and capable people” often “fail to use their abilities to continually adapt and instead resist new information when it is obvious that the old way is working against them.”⁵

Berglas illustrates this refusal to adapt with the story of Sewell Avery, the CEO and chairperson of the department store retailer Montgomery Ward & Co. Prior to his time at the helm of Montgomery Ward, Avery was CEO of the United States Gypsum Company. Having come of age in the depressed 1890s, Avery applied the economic attitudes of his youth to his business by running his company frugally and keeping it debt-free. This approach paid off when the Great Depression arrived. Many of Avery’s competitors were forced to close their doors, but the United States Gypsum Company continued to grow. J.P. Morgan was so impressed with Avery’s leadership that he asked him to take charge of the ailing Montgomery Ward & Co. department store. Avery remained steadfast to his frugal formula throughout the post-World War II economic boom. His approach was so inflexible that, despite warnings from his subordinates, he refused to follow consumers and open stores in the suburbs. His reasoning was that another Great Depression would arrive soon, but it never did. Consequently, Montgomery Ward & Co. fell behind its competitors and never caught up. If Avery had stayed curious and kept learning about the changing market, Montgomery Ward might still be around today.

Regardless of a job’s context, learning skills and openness to new experiences are valuable competencies. Employee selection procedures should focus on candidates who are willing to resist clinging to tried-and-true methods and instead flex their learning abilities. The recent changes wrought by COVID-19 have served as a reminder of the importance of approaching new business environments, organizational and team structures, and social situations with a healthy dose of curiosity and openness.

Work Ethic: Can This Person Be Motivated to Do the Job?

Socially skilled, bright, and adaptable candidates can still fail to fulfill their promise if they are not motivated to work hard. Motivation is formed by personal values that impact career outcomes. If a candidate does not buy into the vision for their role or the company, their work ethic is bound to lag in the long run. Therefore, hiring managers should look for an overlap between candidate and organizational values. A fictitious but helpful example of what happens when employees aren’t motivated can be found in the character Stanley Hudson in the American version of the TV series, The Office.

Although stone-faced Stanley has a history of hitting high sales numbers with Dunder Mifflin Paper Company, he no longer musters the energy to do anything beyond his immediate job description. Stanley’s recurring catch lines are “no” and “do not care.” He refuses to coach younger employees such as Ryan, always leaves the office at 5 p.m. sharp, takes naps during the workday, and does crossword puzzles during meetings. The show makes the reason for his disengagement clear: Stanley does not buy into the vision that his boss Michael presents to his employees. In season 2, Stanley vents his frustration to Michael:

What is wrong with you? Do you have any sense at all? Do you have any idea how to run an office? Every day you do something stupider than you did the day before. And I think, “There’s no possible way he can top that.” But what you do you do? You find a way, damn it, to top it. You are a professional idiot!

The clash between Stanley and Michael becomes a running storyline in the show. Stanley’s disengagement eventually climaxes in season 5, when he has a heart attack due to stress from working in an environment he does not enjoy. Stanley returns to the office with a stress monitor that goes off whenever Michael approaches him. Although fictional, Stanley’s disengagement and resulting health issues are based in reality. According to a Gallup poll, 71% of Americans do not like their jobs and therefore do not work hard or show loyalty to their employers.⁶ Moreover, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health shows that people who work for employers with whom they don’t agree are at higher risk for cardiovascular disease and other health issues.⁷      

Alignment with organizational values will almost certainly affect employee engagement with work, as well as health. In turn, job engagement and health affect whether employees work hard in their roles. Educational psychologist Lee Cronbach summed it up best when he said, “If for each environment there is a best organism, for each organism there is a best environment.”⁸

Success in Employee Selection: A Matter of Good Data and Perspective

While reviewing candidates and what they each have to offer, it is helpful to use these three competencies as a big-picture barometer of hiring success. Understanding where each candidate stands in terms of these criteria helps employers make the best hiring decisions possible, plus anticipate areas that might require special attention or training.

References

1. Larcher, A. (2019, August 16). Hogan Assessments Launches a New Product to Help Organisations Recruit the Right Candidates. Swiss Entrepreneurs Magazine.https://swissentrepreneursmagazine.com/index.php/2019/08/16/hogan-assessments-launches-a-new-product-to-help-organisations-recruit-the-right-candidates/
2. Fernandez, J. (2018). The Entrepreneurial Personality: Meet Steve Jobs. Hogan Press.
3. Cassidy, M. (2016, August 12). Cassidy on Nolan Bushnell: ‘Steve Was Difficult,’ Says Man Who First Hired Steve Jobs. Mercury News. https://www.mercurynews.com/2013/03/28/cassidy-on-nolan-bushnell-steve-was-difficult-says-man-who-first-hired-steve-jobs/
4. Heerwagen, J., Kelly, K., & Kampschroer, K. (2016, October 5). The Changing Nature of Organizations, Work, and Workplace. Whole Building Design Guide. https://www.wbdg.org/resources/changing-nature-organizations-work-and-workplace
5. Kaiser, R. (2009). The Perils of Accentuating the Positive. Hogan Press.
6. Blacksmith, N., & Harter, J. (2011, October 28). Majority of American Workers Not Engaged in Their Jobs. Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/150383/majority-american-workers-not-engaged-jobs.aspx
7. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (1999). Stress… At Work (Publication Number 99-101). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/99-101/default.html#Job%20Stress%20and%20Health
8. Cronbach, L. (1957). The Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology. Classics in the History of Psychology, York University. https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Cronbach/Disciplines/#:~:text=If%20for%20each%20environment%20there,he%20can%20most%20easily%20adapt.

This is the final installment of Hogan’s three-part blog series on selecting and developing artificial intelligence (AI) professionals. In the previous two installments, we discussed the demand for personality insights for artificial intelligence jobs, as well as using Hogan’s Artificial Intelligence Professionals personality profile for selection. In this final part, we will explain how to identify and develop AI professionals who have the potential to become organizational leaders.

Due to the high demand for artificial intelligence skills, organizations might not have a large talent pool from which to choose AI professionals. This may mean sacrificing some desirable aspects of performance, such as managerial potential. Plus, many of the characteristics that make someone a good AI professional won’t necessarily translate to leadership roles. For example, AI roles often involve working independently without needing to rely on a team. Individuals who thrive in independent environments have the potential to become managers who struggle to manage social behavior, communicate expectations, or spend time developing their team members. Fortunately, however, there are evidence-based strategies employers can use to identify and develop artificial intelligence professionals for leadership roles.

Hogan’s personality assessments can help identify the strengths and weaknesses of each employee’s unique personality characteristics. Measuring day-to-day personality (with the Hogan Personality Inventory), potential derailers (with the Hogan Development Survey), and values (with the Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory) can give employees a holistic view of their personalities and an understanding of how their strengths and weaknesses compare to others’. A disparity often exists between how we see ourselves (identity) and how others view us (reputation); Hogan measures reputation, which helps to reduce that disparity. Learning more about how others view our strengths and shortcomings can help us develop strategic self-awareness so we can capitalize on our strengths and start to develop our weaknesses, leading to stronger performance.

Many organizations rely on past performance data to promote employees. However, past performance is an imprecise predictor of future success when roles increase in scope, scale, and complexity. Good managers need to have highly developed interpersonal skills, which involves honest, open, and frequent communication with staff. The best leaders focus on developing others and building effective relationships that garner trust and draw out the best in the people they manage. Good managers should be able to move past their own egos and focus on building and developing high-performing teams. Organizations can use the Hogan assessments to provide opportunities for their employees to gain strategic self-awareness, orienting the organization’s development of current employees toward future opportunities.

Once employees are aware of their reputations, they can begin working on specific behaviors that impact them. As the organization supports their development journey, feedback should be provided to these employees to help inform their efforts and help them understand how to adjust their goals over time. To develop AI professionals for leadership roles, the organization may need to provide additional support, coaching, and structure to help them develop interpersonal skills that might not come naturally.

Organizations can continue to use the results of the Hogan assessments to engage and develop employees throughout their careers and to improve the health of their talent pipeline. If development efforts are only reserved for the highest potentials, organizations might miss out on a larger, more diverse group of talent. If organizations decide on high-potential talent without assessments, effective employees may be overlooked in favor of those who are overtly political but maybe not as effective. Not to mention, waiting to develop talent until they reach the highest levels creates the risk of small problems that could be easily addressed earlier on in an employee’s career becoming bigger issues as stress and pressure increase with job level. By investing in development earlier in the employee life cycle, organizations can strengthen their future pipeline. Change takes time, and the earlier you develop employees, the more practice they will have in developing the skills and coping methods to improve performance based on their strengths, weaknesses, and values.

Employees also see development as a top reason to remain with organizations, so investing in development both prepares future leaders and improves retention among high-value employees. This is especially important for companies hiring for jobs that are in high demand, such as AI jobs. Being able to retain employees in these types of jobs will provide organizations with a competitive advantage and help them save money and become more successful.

Hogan can provide a variety of personality- and competency-based reporting options to help organizations evaluate candidates and improve their assessment processes. To learn more about the Hogan Artificial Intelligence Professional profile, contact your local Hogan distributor or email info@hoganassessments.com.  

This is part two of Hogan’s three-part blog series on selecting and developing artificial intelligence (AI) professionals. In the first installment, we discussed the demand that led to the launch of this project. This time, we’ll explain the research process and the application of the selection profile.

Hogan partnered with consulting firms and clients around the world to improve selection accuracy for AI professionals. Based on our research, we defined AI professionals as individual contributors who are responsible for working with computers to analyze information, interpret and communicate that information to the company to drive strategy and decision-making, and develop and implement solutions to manage data.

Hogan developed a scientifically valid screening tool to identify specific competencies, characteristics, and values that predict job success for AI professionals. Hogan then used this information to build a custom Artificial Intelligence Professionals personality profile using the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI). This profile enables companies to select higher-performing AI professional candidates.

Our research involved two steps. First, we conducted a job analysis. We reviewed job descriptions from O*NET for AI professional jobs, including business intelligence analysts, software developers, data engineers/scientists, and machine-learning specialists. We also conducted focus groups with subject-matter experts, and they completed a quantitative online job analysis survey.

Second, Hogan used validity generalization strategies including job family meta-analysis and synthetic/job component validity to identify the HPI- and HDS-based predictors of successful performance in AI professional jobs. Job analysis results provided evidence for relevant MVPI scales.

Hogan determined that successful AI professionals adapt to new changes and are energized by the challenge of their work. They take initiative to solve problems and can tolerate the more tedious aspects of working with data. In addition, AI professionals have a drive to seek out knowledge and update themselves on new developments related to their work.

By incorporating Hogan’s Artificial Intelligence Professionals personality profile into the candidate assessment process, companies can more effectively select AI professional candidates with the characteristics most important for success in their profession. Hogan’s research shows that if they choose to use our assessments in the selection process, companies can expect to see a 21% improvement in overall accuracy, selecting 10.5% more good hires and avoiding 10.5% more bad hires.

If you are interested in using the Artificial Intelligence Professionals profile for your organization, Hogan has developed a variety of personality- and competency-based reporting options that can help your organization evaluate candidates for AI jobs. To learn more about how you can use the profile, contact your local Hogan distributor or email info@hoganassessments.com.

Some of the biggest and most successful companies in our economy have been using big data for years. Google started with incorporating data algorithms to analyze relationships between websites and improve web searches. Amazon uses a customer database and algorithms to provide personalized shopping recommendations. More recently, Facebook received attention for its use of personal information from billions of users. Researchers mine this data for everything from political ads to personality assessment.¹

Today, it is challenging to find a company that is not using some form of AI. From algorithms to data mining to software development, AI has become a crucial means of becoming globally competitive. Companies such as Booking.com and India’s Flipkart use AI to inform their direction for product development. Websites such as Buzzfeed and Weibo that rely on clicks use AI to optimize the headlines they choose for their articles. Other companies, including Airbnb and Alibaba, use AI to inform their business decisions, while social networking sites such as Instagram and YouTube use it for recommending relevant content.

Given these trends, it is not surprising that AI jobs are in high demand or that the demand for AI skills is increasing. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics lists information security analysts and other data scientists among their top 20 fastest-growing occupations. Employment in these jobs is expected to grow by 31% in the U.S. over the next decade.² Meanwhile, in China the digital economy continues to grow rapidly, having reached $5.45 trillion USD (35.8 trln yuan) in 2019, accounting for 36.2% of the country’s total GDP, according to a report from the Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies.³ The growth is expected to continue over the next two decades and lead to the creation of numerous AI job opportunities. India will also experience an increase in digital growth; according to a McKinsey report, by 2025 the digital economy in India may account for 8% to 10% of India’s GDP.⁴

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Network online database (O*NET) reports a bright outlook for jobs such as computer and information research scientists, database administrators, business intelligence analysts, and computer systems engineers/architects. Burning Glass International, an analytics software company that specializes in job market analytics, has seen an increase in job descriptions that request machine learning skills.⁵ Indeed.com analyzed more than 30,000 listings and found that the top markets for AI jobs are China, the U.S., Japan, and the U.K.⁶

The global demand also means there’s an increased need to identify individuals who will be successful in these roles. As a personality assessment company with more than 40 years of research on job performance, Hogan knows that selecting the right people for these jobs will provide companies a key competitive advantage for becoming successful in the digital economy.

Hogan set out to research who will be most successful in AI professional roles. We interviewed numerous professionals in the digital economy from across the globe.  As an outcome of our research, we created a general profile of personality characteristics that are important for AI professional roles. We identified a variety of jobs that fall into this job family, including business intelligence analysts, data warehouse specialists, database administrators, computer and information research scientists, computer systems engineers, computer systems developers, and data scientists. A review of occupational activities and skills revealed that there is much overlap between these roles. Our final definition of an AI job in this family is “an individual contributor who works with computers to analyze information; interprets and communicates that information to the company to drive strategy and decision-making; and develops and implements solutions to manage data.”

Helping companies select and develop the highest-performing talent is Hogan’s main goal. With this AI professional roles research, we aim to set companies up for future success by understanding the jobs of the future and recommending the highest performers for those roles. 

This is part one of Hogan’s three-part blog series on selecting and developing artificial intelligence professionals, authored by Hogan’s Karen Fuhrmeister, PhD and Krista Pederson. In the next installment, we will discuss the research process we used to identify personality characteristics of successful AI professionals and the application of the selection profile.

References

1. Zialcita, P. (2019, October 30). Facebook Pays $643,000 Fine for Role In Cambridge Analytica Scandal. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2019/10/30/774749376/facebook-pays-643-000-fine-for-role-in-cambridge-analytica-scandal

2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Occupational Outlook Handbook: Fastest Growing Occupations. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/fastest-growing.htm

3. Xinhua. (2020, November 23). China’s Digital Economy Reaches 35.8 trln Yuan in 2019 [Press release]. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-11/23/c_139538040.htm

4. Kaka, N., Madgavkar, A., Kshirsagar, A., Gupta, R., Manyika, J., Bahl, K., & Gupta, S. (2019, March 27). Digital India: Technology to transform a connected nation. McKinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/mckinsey-digital/our-insights/digital-india-technology-to-transform-a-connected-nation#

5. Columbus, L. (2020, December 27). Top 10 job skills predicted to grow the fastest in 2021. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2021/12/27/top-10-tech-job-skills-predicted-to-grow-the-fastest-in-2021/?sh=2b78afef6fde

6. Werber, C. (2019, February 12). This Is Where You Should Move if You Want a Job in AI. Quartz at Work. https://qz.com/work/1547302/the-best-cities-and-countries-to-live-in-if-you-want-a-job-in-ai/

At Hogan we have been warning about widespread use of inaccurate – non-scientifically based – personality tests for decades. When poorly developed hiring assessments are used in high-stakes settings they are damaging to both the individuals being tested and the organizations using them. A newly released HBO Max film highlights the critical importance of using scientifically valid, accurate, and fair personality assessments, like those developed at Hogan. Hogan has always prioritized accuracy, fairness, and constant validation of our assessments above all other factors. On issues of accuracy and fairness, we do not compromise.

At Hogan, we watched the new film with great interest. It discussed many concerns with personality testing and even Industrial/Organizational Psychology as a whole. Unfortunately, the basis for many of those concerns is inaccurate, but we applaud the film’s main premise, which is that non-scientific and discriminatory testing in any form should not be used to make hiring decisions. That point resonates with us. The film also discusses several approaches to personality assessment, although it does not differentiate between scientifically valid and nondiscriminatory kinds of assessments and ones that are neither science-based nor fair, which is disappointing.

Alternatives to hiring assessments

While the film is highly critical of personality assessments, it also never considers the alternatives to personality testing. That is, what if personality tests were not allowed? Two of the most common ways to evaluate job candidates today are the resume review and the interview. It is well-documented that resumes, which contain the applicant’s name and other background characteristics such as schools attended, are subject to discrimination during the review process because a candidate’s sex, gender, and race are often implicitly revealed. And, of course, interviews provide a wealth of information about a candidate’s demographic factors that are not relevant to job performance. As a result, both resume reviews and interviews are well-known to be potential sources of bias and discrimination in the hiring process. The strength of scientifically constructed personality tests is that they are blind to matters of sex, race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. In fact, personality tests have been consistently shown as one of the fairest ways to evaluate candidates for jobs.

The reality is that employers must make judgments about job candidates. The key question omitted by the film is: what is the best way to make those judgments that are both accurate and fair? Abandoning personality testing in favor of resumes and interviews is a recipe for more bias and discrimination. While we appreciate the film drawing attention to the vast array of unscrupulous and harmful test providers on the market, we are disappointed that it failed to recognize the many test providers who provide a fair and accurate way for individuals to be evaluated as job candidates.

We (and many researchers unaffiliated with Hogan) have published research on the accuracy and fairness of our assessments for years. That research is easily accessible to anyone who wants to do their homework on well-developed, appropriately used personality assessments. When considering personality assessments, we urge any potential user to review the research on which they are based and to become fully educated on their appropriate use.

Related Content: Why Free Personality Tests Aren’t Worth the Price