Some companies have turned to character assessments to assist make choices about job candidates. Adobe Inventory
As companies try to rent, retain and promote one of the best expertise, many flip to character assessments to assist make choices about job candidates and workers. These assessments can present useful insights into a person’s cognitive talents and character traits, which might be helpful for matching people to roles and figuring out potential leaders. Nevertheless, there are additionally critical drawbacks to counting on these assessments to drive choice making.
On the subject of character assessments, many individuals instantly consider the Myers-Briggs evaluation. The evaluation relies on Carl Jung’s psychological theories of introversion/extroversion and practical info processing. What’s gotten misplaced within the recognition of the Myers-Briggs evaluation is that Jung’s theories had been simply that — theoretical, with no confirmed scientific foundation. Jung by no means even meant for his theories for use to categorise folks by character sort, and with good purpose: the Myers-Briggs evaluation has been confirmed again and again to haven't any scientific validity in any respect. Individuals are typically identified to retake it and get utterly totally different outcomes. I can solely assume they decide the one they like finest earlier than they put it of their LinkedIn profiles.
The identical lack of validity plagues different well-liked assessments favored by employers, together with the Clifton StrengthsFinder, the DiSC evaluation and the Huge 5 check. I’ve labored with organizations which have used all of them at one level or one other and, whereas the outcomes are at all times fascinating, I’ve but to see the output of those assessments lead to any course of adjustments or contribute to any enchancment in efficiency or outcomes.
The whole absence of scientific validity apart, there are extra causes to restrict or get rid of using such assessments within the office:
They're costly
There's a price for taking the assessments, prices for having licensed facilitators clarify the methodology and the outcomes, prices for the required course materials, and the price of productiveness loss whereas workers undergo the method. With many firms aggressively trying to lower prices because the financial system shifts, these bills needs to be the primary to go.
The outcomes are primarily based on self-reported info
It’s human nature to attempt to give responses that you simply assume the boss will need to see. If you happen to’re a pure introvert, you’re nonetheless more likely to report your self as being extra extroverted than you might be should you’re a part of a high-energy gross sales workforce. Even when there is no such thing as a consequence that's perceived as extra fascinating than one other, we’re all more likely to emphasize the issues we like about ourselves whereas minimizing what we understand to be our weaknesses. With such biased enter, how a lot credit score can we give to the outcomes?
They create pointless bias
With the outcomes of those assessments on file, managers and HR departments could use them as standards when making hiring and promotion choices. Whereas I’m positive they imply properly, is it actually truthful to find out somebody’s management capability primarily based on how introverted they're or what’s lacking from their prime 5 strengths? I don’t assume so.
They create the chance for the brother of bias: Stereotyping
Lumping folks right into a handful of buckets that supposedly outline them can create an in-group/out-group dynamic inside a corporation. These thought-about INTJ “Masterminds” by the Myers-Briggs evaluation could develop a sense of superiority over ESFJ “Suppliers.” Leaders could determine that they’ll develop a high-performing workforce in the event that they select these with strategic pondering and execution abilities, foregoing the equally necessary however “softer” strengths of relationship constructing and influencing.
I’ve at all times discovered it ironic that organizations so typically declare to champion the individuality of every worker whereas concurrently spending time and sources trying to scale back them to a neatly-labeled “sort.”
Nonetheless, character assessments stay well-liked for 2 causes: It’s very comforting for folks to have the ability to put labels on one another, and everybody likes to find out about themselves, even when the outcomes are ambiguous and meaningless (the recognition of BuzzFeed quizzes proves this).
My recommendation to organizations that use these instruments is to avoid wasting their money and time. Making the trouble to get to know folks as people is the one method to be taught sufficient about them to make good choices, promote the fitting candidates and construct the strongest groups. No labeling required.
Heather Webb is the proprietor and lead advisor at Webb Consulting Group, a administration consulting and government teaching agency in Woods Cross, Utah.