Legalities of Using Testing and Assessments
Excerpt from Right Person - Right Job Guess or Know
There are many misunderstandings regarding the legal use of testing and assessments in the business world. Certainly there is a maze of federal and state regulations and guidelines that can easily intimidate the average business person. The media has all too often publicized some rather dramatic misuses of testing, creating the impression that is but an all but certain recipe for disaster. It is reminiscent of a childhood memory of pleading for a BB gun or birthday present, and being told that a BB gun would shoot my eye, my friend’s eye, and even the eyes of total strangers. Both of these fantastic exaggerations of a real, but manageable concern.
The reality is that the proper and consistent of effective testing and assessment systems can dramatically strengthen a companies legal position. Job related testing and assessments are essentially the only way to document objective and non-discriminatory hiring practices. In the three part paradigm of the selection process, illustrated by the three interlocking circles, the area most susceptible to bias or discrimination is Company Fit, which it largely determined by interviewing. Only the testing components are purely objective. Skills Match may or may not be measurable depending on the job. Only Job Fit (hard-wired cognitive abilities and personality traits necessary for critical job behaviors), when measured by the proper assessment instrument, is completely objective. As Hogan (1990) correctly points out, “bias is social component of the decision making process, not a feature of the test results; therefore a primary advantage of test use is that test, unlike interviewers, are incapable of being prejudiced by the applicants race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, religion, age, or disability.”
While this book is principally addressed to employers, it must be remembered that there are always two losers when an employee does fit the job for which they were hired. The company loses the time, energy, and money spent on coaching and training, of course, there is the loss of performance. Equally important is the employee’s loss of time and energy that is invested in the wrong opportunity. That part of their life cannot be replaced. The information provided by effective and properly used assessments can help each party arrive at the best decision. Every legal guideline and regulation supports that purpose. If fact, it is inconsistent with the spirit of EEOC and ADA legislation to hire a person for whom the probability of reasonable success in the job is limited.
Under the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1994), a selection process must provide fair and equal employment opportunities to all applicants. Testing may be used: 1) To group applicants in accordance with the likelihood of their successful performance 2) To group applicants in accordance with the likelihood of their successful performance 3) To rank applicants, selecting those with the highest scores for employment Armed with knowledge and reasonable awareness, any business can take advantage of the power of assessments and testing information, and at the same time, strengthen it’s legal compliance.
About the Author Chuck Russell is the author of Right Person - Right Job, Guess or Know. In his twenty years as an authority on the business applications of psychometric tools, he has served as an expert witness on the legal applications of assessment instruments; partnered with a major labor law firm to audit the hiring practices of companies; and designed selection systems specifically to strengthen non-discriminatory practices. He has consulted with the general counsel of several Fortune 100 companies to ensure that no adverse impact existed in their selection processes
The reality is that the proper and consistent of effective testing and assessment systems can dramatically strengthen a companies legal position. Job related testing and assessments are essentially the only way to document objective and non-discriminatory hiring practices. In the three part paradigm of the selection process, illustrated by the three interlocking circles, the area most susceptible to bias or discrimination is Company Fit, which it largely determined by interviewing. Only the testing components are purely objective. Skills Match may or may not be measurable depending on the job. Only Job Fit (hard-wired cognitive abilities and personality traits necessary for critical job behaviors), when measured by the proper assessment instrument, is completely objective. As Hogan (1990) correctly points out, “bias is social component of the decision making process, not a feature of the test results; therefore a primary advantage of test use is that test, unlike interviewers, are incapable of being prejudiced by the applicants race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, religion, age, or disability.”
While this book is principally addressed to employers, it must be remembered that there are always two losers when an employee does fit the job for which they were hired. The company loses the time, energy, and money spent on coaching and training, of course, there is the loss of performance. Equally important is the employee’s loss of time and energy that is invested in the wrong opportunity. That part of their life cannot be replaced. The information provided by effective and properly used assessments can help each party arrive at the best decision. Every legal guideline and regulation supports that purpose. If fact, it is inconsistent with the spirit of EEOC and ADA legislation to hire a person for whom the probability of reasonable success in the job is limited.
Under the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (1994), a selection process must provide fair and equal employment opportunities to all applicants. Testing may be used: 1) To group applicants in accordance with the likelihood of their successful performance 2) To group applicants in accordance with the likelihood of their successful performance 3) To rank applicants, selecting those with the highest scores for employment Armed with knowledge and reasonable awareness, any business can take advantage of the power of assessments and testing information, and at the same time, strengthen it’s legal compliance.
About the Author Chuck Russell is the author of Right Person - Right Job, Guess or Know. In his twenty years as an authority on the business applications of psychometric tools, he has served as an expert witness on the legal applications of assessment instruments; partnered with a major labor law firm to audit the hiring practices of companies; and designed selection systems specifically to strengthen non-discriminatory practices. He has consulted with the general counsel of several Fortune 100 companies to ensure that no adverse impact existed in their selection processes
