As organizations attempt to become more efficient and effective in their management of personnel in the hiring, firing and promotional processes, many organizations have been looking to a variety of testing practices to help sort through the wide array of applicants in the most objective way possible. Many of these tests include, merit based tests, drug testing, polygraph testing, background checks, and personality/emotional intelligence testing. These tests have been used and proven not to have a disparate impact on Title XII classifications of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; however, if so, they were proven to be a Bonafide Occupational Qualification. With this justification, many organizations are increasingly implementing such tests. As …show more content…
Instead they have delegated the task of screening applicants for impersonal measurements” (Smith, 29). In many cases it can be perceived that employers are using these tests as successful indicators although invasive and inaccurate of a potential employee’s character and ability to perform. Therefore, it is imperative for organizations to find the balance between successful implementation of pre-employment testing and the inaccuracy of such tests as it relates to future employees. This paper serves to determine the legal, moral, and ethical issues associated with the implementation of such tests. After identifying the key issues that are most pertinent to the implementation of these tests, the paper will present possible solutions to counteract these problems. They reflect the controlled use of any testing in the work place for human resource management processes. The solutions presented include: the understanding of personality diversity, the controlled implementation of Emotional Intelligence and Self-Evaluation for development, and the use of the information to create mixed teams for increased efficiency and creativity. These mixed teams use the issue of diversity for the benefit of the employer and employees for internal development and hiring purposes. If an organization is more likely to press for diversity in personality and emotional intelligence the less problematic this issue
The down side to the Federal Technician testing is that each employee was hired sight-unseen based on our test scores. While each and every one of us was excellent at the jobs we were hired for, there were some fairly serious personality and hygiene issues in the bunch. One of the hires weighed over 500 pounds and, though intelligent, required two plane tickets every time she traveled. Another had such repulsive personal hygiene issues that the entire office turned against her, customers wouldn’t work with her and she was ultimately asked to resign. An interview would have not only established the individual’s capabilities but would have identified those that would ultimately become a liability to the
Dalton, D. R. and M. B. Metzger: 1992, ‘Integrity Testing’ for Personnel Selection: An Unsparing Perspective’, Journal of Business Ethics
Genetic profiling is a contemporary issue relating to the individual and technology which restricts access to unbiased decisions and privacy. Genetic profiling interferes with the individuals bodily, genetic and behavioural privacy, as it can be used for the benefit of identifying bodies to using the results of a DNA test to choose whether to employ one individual over another, due to future concerns. It can easily be argued that genetic profiling is in the need of law reform as a result of legal implications and the lack of individual’s rights.
Discrimination in the workplace is typified by failure to treat individuals equally due to biases against various group membership (Triana, Jayasinghe, & Pieper, 2015). The United States enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964, known as Title VII, to outlaw workplace discrimination of individuals with respect to compensation, terms, conditions of employment, or privileges of employment because of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. Following Title VII, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was established to enforce Title VII protocols in the public and private sector (Crumpacker & Crumpacker, 2007). Proceeding 1964, several addendums were legislated to include protection against discrimination for individuals with respect to: sexual orientation, age, disability, pregnancy, and genetic information (Brooks, Doughtery, & Price, 2015). The engagement of any employer in discrimination against members of any previously listed affiliations is not only deemed unethical, but is also considered unlawful in the United States.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 all prohibit the use of discriminatory employment tests and selection procedures. A fair selection process consists of judging people on their ability to do the job and not on the basis of race, color, sex, age, national origin, religion, genetic information or disability.
Employers that use hiring test must ensure the test is job related and consistent with business necessity as required under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP) (Maurer, R., 2016). These regulations govern how an organization uses such assessments as a way to discriminate against a potential employee’s race, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and age. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has laws that prohibit employers from discriminating against potential employees (Insureon Blog.,
While equal rights and equal pay legislation made it illegal to discriminate “based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin“ (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2011b, p. 1), the number of workplace discrimination cases continue to rise and is costing employers more than $319 million in 2010, not counting litigation (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2011a). Many employers have extensive human resource organizations with a sophisticated grasp on the implications of equal rights legislation on employers, that employ professionals, like I/O psychologists and attorneys, to establish fair policies and employment practices, and decrease an employer’s risk of litigation (Aamodt, 2010). In fact, employers often perform statistical analysis of employment practices to understand whether the practice could have an adverse impact against members of a protected class. For example, testing is a practice employers use for employee selection in the hiring process; even when an employment test is determined to be reliable, valid, and cost-efficient, care is taken to assure testing predicts performance equally well for all applications (Aamodt, 2010). Because governments and corporations have a fiduciary duty to citizens and shareholders, employers should continue to care about the issue of adverse impact, but more importantly, both government and corporations have a civil responsibility to treat the members of society fairly, because societal
The capacity to team up with others and settle on powerful choices to meet business targets is fundamental. Subsequently, understanding the identities of potential and existing employees is essential. Therefore, while a talk on identity hypothesis can be wide a diagram of how individual and self-evaluation tests are utilized to quantify identity and increase mindfulness are essential for businesses. There is a need to perceive the premise of employee's personality types with a specific end goal to better mentor and create them as indispensable parts of the workforce. Overall, individuals are their own one of a kind selves, at the same time, with every single individual there is a comparability. My test outcomes are just pieces of who I am inside however it gives a diagram of how I am and how I function in this present reality and how some other individuals are much the same as me. This makes for a different world as unique and fascinating as it may
According to a recent survey, approximately 13 percent of all employers in the U.S use personality tests to assess people when hiring. The majority of these being the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator test, a personality test developed by Katherine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers. This test places you in one of 16 personality types based on your answers. The widespread usage of this test can become an issue due to the fact that the Myers-Briggs test is already largely controversial for its inability to accurately depict one’s personality type. Yet, so many companies still use this test.
The advantages of relying on tests or assessments to select the best job candidate is highly dependent of whether or not the assessment measures the most influential business outcomes for the company doing the hiring. It is important to remember that evaluating candidates is not the primary goal when using assessments. Improving performance outcomes of employees is the ultimate goal of choosing and using the most effective assessment. Companies are in business to increase their bottom line. Learning about their potential employees and
Companies have started to use personality tests in the past five years so that they can find a potential employee’s strengths and weaknesses. If questions and answers are quite accurate and test is done properly it can help an employer to find more about person’s advantages and disadvantages. It is very important to know because one of the most important points is that most of personality tests help to recognize unqualified candidates. “Although experts warn that many personality assessments don't deliver what they promise, legitimate scientifically validated tests are helping employers evaluate job candidates to select those best suited for particular positions. Other tests are designed to measure intelligence, honesty, management aptitude and other qualities.”
as the only way to access whether a person is suitable for the job is
Selecting the right employee to fill a position is one of the most challenging decision making processes a company has to make. The ultimate goal of employee selection is to hire the candidate who is most compatible not only with the organization but for the position that they are trying to fill. In order for the candidate to be successful in a particular position, their talents and personal goals must be taken into consideration and objectives need to be utilized in order to retain qualified individuals. The most common forms of selection methods are resumes and applications but testing, interviews, reference checks, honesty tests, medical exam and drug
For many years companies have depended on three basic tools, such as résumés, interviews and references to gather qualified candidates. These sources are commonly used in a day to day basis but have proven to be inadequate for consistently selecting good employees. When it comes to hiring and selecting you want to use productive tools to help determine the best decision possible. Using the incorrect tools to hire and test potential candidates causes employee turnover and retention. Companies need to understand what pre-employment assessments are and why they are effective. I will be discussing the best means of hiring and testing new employees. Exploring what other companies are doing in hiring and testing, accessing the positives and negatives of each, and lastly offering recommendations to our department.
Many organizations depend only on the result of the test without taking the reliability and validity into considerations, which that might lead to in hiring the wrong people. What is the difference between reliability and validity? “Reliability is the consistency and the stability of a selection measurement and validity is the degree to which a measure predicts on-the-job performance” (Green, 2003). For instance, the consistency of a test is made for to measure reliability and what kind of method to use to test the candidate is to measure validity. Since reliability and validity are both important aspects in the selection process, let’s look at several methods that are used in today’s industries.