Greetings from HR Land!
Thank you for all the feedback! Apparently we struck a nerve and many readers agree: Corporate HR folks and Hiring Managers all need to put on their big girl or big boy underpants and do their jobs correctly, professionally, and expediently!
For your reading pleasure, we offer today's query:
Answer #2
You could be talking about 2 different things - or perhaps three; the third being that said individual needs to phone their own E.A.P. (Employee Assistance Program) ;-)
When the economy begins to pick up, and companies begin to really hire, we will again find the question of “pre-employment testing” front and center. It’s not a "big news story" now as few companies are hiring. It only hits the news when there’s a lawsuit/settlement, “shocking” allegation, or great story.
Standard interview questions are different from assessments. I’m not saying they’re good, but they are common and symbolic of the “look at the new thing we’re trying that costs no money” mentality.
I'm often shocked by the lack of both preparation and professionalism demonstrated by interviewers at all levels, and I firmly believe ALL hiring managers should be required to successfully complete (yes, with assessment) a "Legal and Effective Hiring" workshop. Then again, it would help if the recruiters sent them good candidates as we discussed yesterday.
I hold “group interviews” with a special level of contempt. Not because they are ridiculous and often pit humans against one another, but because many companies blindly use them without looking at the success rate/data. Good group interviews serve a specific purpose and should be one data point in a whole matrix. Bad group interviews waste everyone’s time.
Regarding written tests, one only has to look at the current legal settlement with minority Fire Fighter candidates in Chicago
Some companies believe these "tests" work because they never bother to study the data. Some companies continue with methods they have used for years - when such things were legal.
Some companies use screenings, that are legal, validated, and WORK as part of the process. A test score should never be the sole determining factor in a hiring decision.
I believe actual scenario-based work-relevant interviewing results in the best hires. I also am a firm believer - because of the data - of peer-interviewing and realistic job previews. The people you would be working with, when properly trained, give an applicant the best overview of the job and help candidates self-select out.
Time and time again during exit interviews I have heard, “Had I only know what the job was really like, I never would have applied.” There is the “right person” for every job, the trick is to find the right person.
Way back (and I mean way way back)I helped establish a EAP but it was basically put into place to help employees with mental problems.
ReplyDeleteWell, come to think of it, it still is about mental problems with a different connotation.
My site today: I want the greedy SOB's schackled and perp-walked down Wall Street. Will you help? http://www.ronaldteejohnson.com
Way to go Progressive - great stuff as usual