Employers Relying On Personality Tests To Screen Applicants -WP

[Rose Siding]

UNIVERSAL CITY, Calif. -- The 10 young men and women were there to impress.

Decked out in their best suits, they were vying for hourly work as sales associates, ride operators, drivers and cooks at Universal Studios Hollywood theme park and its adjoining retail unit. When asked their favorite movie, they mentioned ones they knew were produced by Universal. When asked what they detested most about their previous jobs, they said not much. And when asked what single word would describe them best, several quickly offered "happy."

Even before the candidates had stepped through the door for the group interview, their fate had been largely determined by a computer. They had taken a 50-minute online test that asked them to rate to what degree they agreed or disagreed with statements such as, "It's maddening when the court lets guilty criminals go free," "You don't worry about making a good impression" and "You could describe yourself as 'tidy'."
...
Annie Murphy Paul, author of "The Cult of Personality," which is about the testing industry, said there is a real danger of stigmatizing people who fail certain components of tests. "If we are labeling people liars and thieves even before they have seen any propensity for them to do these things, it is a real injustice," she said.
...
As the candidates sat in the waiting room, a recruiter began to review printouts of their assessment results. Some who came in that day looked like they might work out -- others less so. One candidate who wanted to be a dishwasher rated 35 for customer service and 47 for dependability. A rating of "yellow." This person was less likely "to maintain a good mood," the computer cautioned. Another was applying to be a theater attendant and had strong previous experience but scored 10 for customer service, 13 for dependability. A "red" rating. This person might "be quiet or even unfriendly" and might tend to "waste time."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4010-2005Mar26_2.html

[coloradodem2005]

1. In defense of Meyers-Briggs...

...it is not used to discriminate against people, it is for the benefit of the takers of the test, not for computers to stigmatize people by categories.

[aquart]

3. Uh huh.

That's so obvious here.

[Rose Siding]

8. Sure, for personal or therapeutic use

The MMPI is useful too, but for employment screening?

If this is an industry trend, I think it's disturbing. We'll all have to up our Prozac dosages to be considered for employment.

[LoganW]

16. Many companies use this test

including one I have worked for.

[Selteri]

41. I was forced ot take this test

It was inacurate in places, in other places it was pretty accurate.

It was right in calling me an introverted extrovert... but it was pretty wrong with some other things about me, half of the test seemed to even conflict and contradict with itself on my results.

[Mairead]

59. It's discriminatory. This was already decided in the '70s.

Employers must show that any test they give (a) focuses on traits of legitimate interest to the particular job being applied for and (b) does a good job of separating out those people who would do well from those who would do poorly. If they cannot show those two things, requiring the test as a condition of employment is unfair employment discrimination.

And, basically, they cannot show it. Tests aren't sophisticated enough. The MMPI, for instance, does a nice job of identifying people who are deeply troubled, but has nothing to say about whether an averagely-balanced person would, for example, be a good cop, dishwasher, or rocket scientist.

Unless one of the vandals since then destroyed the records, there should be case law in the EEOC archives about this.

[Triana]

66. The EEOC is gutted and has little power...

...the EEOC is one of the most underfunded gov't agencies and their willingness and ability to enforce *any* employment law is limited, at best.

Employers don't have to prove anything. They don't have to pay you. They don't have to give you vacation time you've earned. Nothing.

They can do as they damn well please and there is little GWB, Inc., the EEOC, or anyone else can or will do about it - unless the employee spends LOTS of time and money pursuing it and then it's likely an exercise in futility.

The *laws* are there. But, as is, they're unenforcable and the agency, the EEOC, is underfunded, our current gov't regime will do nothing to change that, and even if they weren't underfunded, the laws protect employers, not employees.

This has been the experience of some people I know pretty well, so that's why I say this. The EEOC? Puhleeeze. Forget about it.

You *think* any employment laws here protect you? Think again...

[Mairead]

68. My point is that it's already established that the burden of proof

is on the employer to show that the test is appropriate and effective. If you get screened out, you can take them to court, if you want to and have the money (after letting the underfunded EEOC timeout), and you'll win.

[RoyGBiv]

10. Benefit of the test takers?

The hell you say... I have never, in my life, taken a test that was for *my* benefit.

I've seen how these tests are used, in all kinds of situations. Anyone who scores "low" in a category important to the person giving the test is naturally stigmatized. That's not necessarily wrong. If the test were to judge a skill in a certain area, a low score would stigmatize the person as unskilled in that area. That's necessary. I don't want a doctor performing surgery on me who can't pass Incisions 101.

Personality tests are a different sort of animal. They attempt to make objective what is inherently subjective and resistant to concise definition. What is "customer service skill" anyway? Is it a person who always pleases the customer? The intuitive answer might be "yes," but always pleasing the customer can be bad for the company, for instance in cases where the only way to please the customer is to give free service or goods.

My previous employer used these kinds of tests in much the same way as mentioned in the article. The results were absurd, but you can't tell anyone in HR that because they have studies supposedly proving me wrong. Well, I had to deal with the results as a manager of these people. Those who scored highest as "friendly, hardworking, customer oriented" people tended to be the worst employees. Why? Most of them were habitual liars.

[Autobot77]

26. More like benefit of the test making companies

EOM

[Selteri]

42. This test being discussed considers compassion to be a weakness. NT

[Igel]

46. It can be.

One employer I worked for (the owner of a small important and clothing company) felt sorry for a lot of stores buying her wares.

They had bad credit ratings, and just wanted "another chance." I refused to authorize credit, they asked to speak to the owner. She overrode my decisions. They wanted another chance to defraud somebody, that is.

Compassion: A few hundred thousand $ credit?
Bankruptcy: Priceless.

Compassion in the right place is wonderful. This woman was in love with showing others her compassion, and wasn't using compassion to show her love for others.

[Selteri]

64. That's not Compassion, that's gullability.

I'm a nice person, but no pay - no product. I've dealt with too many people who do that.

[cosmicdot]

13. Myers-Briggs can be a useful tool ...

I wish I had the 'insight' back when I was in HS ... and, not 20 some years later ... here at DU, we've had a couple of threads on ID'ing our MB personality types ...

I think that it can be abused by bad management.

I'm sure that a former employer, never ever showing any interest in MB, suddenly administered the test to one particular group (not company-wide) so they could use the tool in a negative way. They learned what things certain personality types would find annoying. Retaliation and retribution tool for good ol'boy networks feeling threatened (the same behavior this White House exhibits).

If an employer deems an ESTJ personality to be the acceptable personality for employment ... an INFP, the complete opposite personality type, may be discriminated against ... despite having qualities to be successful.

You're exactly right: it should not be used with computers to stigmatize people. It's a tool to help an individual to improve ... and, imo, MB can be a tool to improve group inter-personal-employee relations ... conflict management and prevention (learning to deal and react with one another - improving morale and understanding).


for anyone interested:

online test
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp


http://keirsey.com/


Extroversion and Introversion (E/I)
Intuition and Sensing (N/S)
Thinking and Feeling (T/F)
Judgement and Perception (J/P)

[IndianaGreen]

47. It has been abused by many employers, including my own

BTW, I am not SJ!

[Deja Q]

52. How's it a benefit to me? How come so many who pass seem to fail in real

life too?

I've applied for dozens of jobs; didn't get any of them. Took the wretched test for them all. Many of those jobs were simply stacking goods on shelves, organizing them in proper order. Sheesh, do you know how many people who are hired don't give a fuck when putting out the oldest milk in the front, keeping the freshest stuff way in the back? (amongst other perishables) Naturally I'll dig, that's why I see so many cartons and cans out of proper order. I didn't make it that way; the underpaid employee who understandably didn't give a fuck didn't do his job.

I've gone to stores and asked for help. Many associates seem to be rude and I was as nice as pie. What'd they answer right that I failed, though I know why I'd fail as I can be pretty rude if my mind was set on doing a certain task too.

I can't even get a tech job at best buy despite having 14 years of EXPERIENCE and I know more than them on the relevant issues. (So I won't lie about their bollocks extended warranty program, maybe that's why I don't get hired?)

Work with people. Not blindly discriminate. How can I pay for the zoloft and adderall if I can't get the job to get them? Or do they want us dead?

[Tux]

2. Personality tests

Are big right now in personality psych and getting there in I/O psych. I read a book last year that promoted these tests as a good way of getting good employees and filtering out the unwanted by using tests.

Is there any wonder I wish I could renouce psych and claim to have another major?

[lenidog]

5. Those tests are such utter and complete BS

[Jersey Ginny]

63. No, they are not utter BS, and that's the problem

They DO measure the traits mentioned. The problem is that personality issues are gray areas and ruling people out based on these tests is unfair and may not be good for the company. It's much better to train people how to conduct interviews, which is not something that seems to be done much. Even then, its a crap shoot and you need good managers to train people and hold them accountable for performance in a fair way.

[shanti]

29. lol

i was a psych major too....

[Selteri]

43. I did, I jumped from Psych to computers to computer art..

I'm a glass blower because there are no jobs though. Sad when a hobbby becomes your living.

[arikara]

54. I can think of nothing better

than to have your hobby become your living. I hope that you are doing well at it and still enjoying it. I just started doing stained glass and when I get better at it I'd like to make a living at it too.

I recently lost my job as a software tester and have no desire to go back into the industry if I can help it. They expect copious amounts of overtime for nothing and if you balk at working a Saturday, you're not a team player. By the time all the overtime is factored in, you're working for minimum wage and not having any sort of a life at all. Everyone is stressed and angry all the time. I was so glad when they gave me my walking papers.

[Selteri]

65. Well, it took me a few months to get up to snuff

but aside from having been downed for a month with a horrible flu-infection combo, I'm not doing too badly, the spring and summer festivals should do very well for me.

I do love it, I just wish I had a second job to fall back on for those really lean months I've had.

[FlemingsGhost]

4. Actually, I'm all for employment-related personality tests

If they don't like my "kind," I don't want to help them make money.

[coloradodem2005]

6. If one doesn't like your "kind" none of them will.

Likely. It is just another way to put people into categorical boxes and even goes as far as to label certain categories as undesireable. It is all a bunch of bullshit. I don't think there is anybody out there that likes my "type".

[FlemingsGhost]

7. Seeing that it is highly unlikely I'd work for the likes of Universal ...

or anyone else who would use these, I'm not concerned.

[coloradodem2005]

11. Retail stores use these things too.

Some people who have fallen through the cracks may have to get retail jobs and will not get hired because of these stupid tests.

[Selteri]

44. So do insurance, stock and marketing/advertising companies. NT

[Dr.Phool]

9. I guess I failed one about 15 years ago.

It was for a cable tv salesman. I had had 3 sales jobs in the previous 20 years during times when I was laid off in my main career. I was the top salesman for thos companies in 2 of them, and 2nd in the other.

I didn't get the job because of a stupid test.

[barb162]

20. yeah that is what is scary about them, sort of like there is only

one type of manager or CEO. I bet many people who institute these tests couldn't get jobs at their own companies if they had to take these tests.

[Charles19]

55. I had this happen too

Test said I was "exaggerating" answers. I asked what that meant and the guy just said "I don't know either".

I knew people already working for the place I was applying at and they said the test was primarily used as an excuse for them to not hire people on ethnic grounds. Like there was a high number of immigrants in this town and they could not hire them because of the "test" but it was really because they didn't want to employ the immigrants. I thought about pushing the issue but thought if the organization discriminated like this I did not want to use my talents to help grow their business. Best to just look for organizations with better ethics.

[davsand]

12. Years ago those things were popular.

I had no idea they were back en vogue.

I worked for a company as a manager in a retail store for several years. The corporate bucket heads decided those tests were gonna be the key to theft prevention and a reduction in turnover thus they decreed them to be used for all new hires.

Just to see what the test was like the managers got together over a few cocktails and took that test. We answered honestly and failed it. It had statements like "I think most people are honest" and you had to either agree or disagree. If you said no to that particular question it was supposed to indicate YOU are dishonest.

At that point we decided to just fill in the tests for people and screw it. We never used one for a hire unless we filled it in for them ahead of time, and I doubt that corporate ever knew the difference.

Gawd, I hated those things. The only thing I can suggest to anyone faced with one of those tests is to answer the questions just like you think some uptight old lady would.



Laura

[RoyGBiv]

15. Yup ...

Same deal with me, except in my situation we had people whose only job was to hire and fire people, and we had little to no input in the hiring process.

The ironic part of this for a retail environment is that the results they want depend on the person taking the test being honest with their answers. Anyone who has encountered these things, or even knows about them, has some idea of how to answer. It doesn't take a dishonest person to answer in such a way that their likelihood of being hired is enhanced, but a dishonest person will most certainly do it. The test we used had questions related to drug use. Only an idiot, or someone who didn't want the job in the first place, would mark "agree" to "Casual use of marijuana is okay." Funny how we had a lot of pot smokers working for us.

[1monster]

37. Years ago, I worked for a company that was bought out by another

company. The day the new company took over, they had one of their loss/prevention people come in to talk to us first. And the first thing that he told us was, "We at (company name) believe that everyone is a thief. And if you haven't stolen anything yet, it is because you just haven't had the opportunity."

Is it necessary to tell you that this company was the most dishonest company I ever worked for? They seriously overcharged their customers, set their employees against each other (even upper management), and it was not unheard of for them to erase overtime from an employee's time sheet. Since this happened during the first Bush recession in the 1990/91, they got away with it. There were no other jobs to be had in our neck of the woods at the time and people held on to the jobs they had regardless of the crap they had to put up with.

Generally, when someone believes that everyone is dishonest, you can bet your bottom dollar that that person is projecting his/her own dishonesty on to others. Those who tend to believe that everyone is honest are probably honest and somewhat naive. My own belief is that probably everyone has their breaking point, but some people will never meet theirs and others will meet their breaking point quite easily and very early on.

[LoganW]

14. I've taken this test!!!

"It's maddening when the court lets guilty criminals go free"

I remember this question and it pissed me off. How do I know if a court let a guilty criminal go free? Was I on the jury? Then how the hell would I know if they're guilty or not? Unlike FOX news I can't play judge and jurty.

It also asked questions such as "My mood is stable from day to day". Thus anyone bi-polar who answers that question honestly is screwed.

[shraby]

19. Is that the test that asks

"what do you think people think of you"? I never have given a thought to what people think of me. Didn't know how to answer.

[LoganW]

22. No different test

but a basic understanding of psychology can allow you to pass it relatively easily. For example, being a "thrill seeker" is supposedly a common psychological motivator for theft.

[Autobot77]

27. LOL!

Your right, though sadly many repukes feel that way.

[karlrschneider]

17. Thirty years ago when I was chief pilot for a company, (and wore other

hats as well) my boss asked me to go to Fort Worth to 'evaluate' one of these kinds of testing programs. (I suspected then and still do it was more to do with me than a general inquiry into the applicability of such a test)

So I hopped in the company plane & showed up. The 'test' had a lot of goofy crap, sort of a mixture of a general IQ evaluation, trivia and psychobabblistic nonsense. I did fine with the factual stuff like 'how far is it from New York to Paris', but poorly on the parts that asked things like "if you had to kill your mother or your father, which one would it be?"

I deliberately skewed the answers on those goofy questions just to fuck with them. When I got back and the boss got my 'results', he said it worried him so I suggested HE go take the 'test.' He actually did and admitted later to me that according to his own score, he wasn't fit to even work for his own company, let alone run it. I laughed my ass off...he wasn't pleased but for years after he and his brother, the Exec VP would ride with me in our plane at the same time but not together on
an airline. In retrospect it was somewhat humorous.
;-)

[Skittles]

24. what kind of sick question is that?

who would you kill - I would not answer such a question; what do you suppose that would tell them about me? :o

[Digit]

18. Yep, I just had one of those tests, and am told I did not do well on it.

Luckily, they are giving me a second interview anyway.

If I DON'T get this job, (which I really DO want), what is the secret to passing?

Oh, and I have heard before that I am WAYYY too honest. I even found close to $300 on the floor in my workplace one day, and turned it into my boss. He was surprised, and told me that HE would not have done that! Guess what? After two weeks, nobody claimed it, and he gave it to me! That was in the early 70's and it was alot of money back then.

And "NO", I find that most people are not honest.

[LoganW]

21. Here is the secret

If you are asked "I am a bit of a thrill seeker" or something along those lines and you are a sky diver or like to mountain climb you had better STRONGLY DISAGREE. Because what that question REALLY asks is "I like to steal".

In psychology and the corporate world "thrill seeker" = thief.

Another common question is that you like to be in a crowd/with people. Always yes.

Also - be careful with how questions are worded! Usually you will get a question like "I like to be with people" and then "I like to be in a crowd". If you answer differently on one question compared to the other it hurts you because in the tests eyes you contradicted your self. (lied)

A lot of questions are obvious, some are not. Like "You can trust people". If you disagree you're screwed because according to the test you are a liar.

[Orangepeel]

45. I failed one of those tests for a retail store about 15 years ago

I was in my first semester at college and taking an intro psych course in which were warned about "social desirability" questions on a test -- questions designed to indicate the degree to which people were answering the questions they way they thought they were supposed to be answered instead of honestly (e.g., "I have never told a lie.")

So, stupid me decided to answer the questions honestly rather than the way they were supposed to be answered. I over-thought everything and failed it.

It was a long time ago, so I don't remember much about it, but I do remember a question like: "Indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statement: It is always wrong to break the law." Like a moron, I start thinking of Gandhi and MLK and DON'T pick the strongest agreement possible.

Another question asked if sometimes society is to blame when people steal things. :eyes:

I'm sure your tests are more complex than this, but to pass the one I failed, I would have just had to answer like a judgmental fundamentalist Sunday School teacher would tell his students they were supposed to feel.

[Elidor]

23. Does anyone have a crib sheet for the MB?

If we all knew how to fake it, they'd stop giving it.

[Autobot77]

28. Hey good idea, any psychologists in the house?

[Autobot77]

25. I hate these tests

I don't believe they work, since they are subjective. I remember reading somewhere supposedly companies aren't allowed to base thier decision on whether to hire you or not solely on one of these tests.
I remember one of the tests I took had some fucked up questions like "I like waffles" or some shit like that.

[FormerOstrich]

30. I use to give Meyers-Briggs

test to my team members as part of team building. The first time was pushed on me by HR...after that I was more than willing to go through it. The point is so you have a better understanding of how others approach situations differently. There are no "wrong" or "right" answers and there are no "good" or "bad" classifications. Furthermore, the categories are your natural tendency...no that you never deviate from your natural disposition, because you do.

We typically had fun with it. I had one person that was reluctant to take it and I told him he didn't have to...nothing was ever said about him not taking it from me or the other members.

Personally, I wouldn't know how to alter the results in MB. The questions just don't seem, at least to me, to lend themselves to what they are intended for. I always have trouble with yes/no questions, as I don't see things that cut and dry. However, the results do seem to match how I am (ENTJ for any MB people that are wondering).

Now that I said all that, I do think there are personality index tests that are deplorable. Additionally, the tend to lean more to wards white males (no I don't have a link but I have read that and believe it). I think the use of ANY personality test as a basis of hiring is terrible.

[I_Make_Mistakes]

31. I worked on Wall Street

Had my employment history, FBI background checked (2nd time for a job), financial survey previous, current and future, urine testing, all scrutinized. I must not have done well on the local retail chain store interview, because, I never even got a call for an interview.

Do you know how hard it is to get a job for a Wall Street firm? I guess retail employees have a much greater responsibility. I dealt with billion dollar transactions, not 100's.

It was for part-time employment. and yes, I took the Meyers-Bring personality testing in 95. I think I am an an ENFP. I would have to look it up, but it is here.

It was pretty accurate, but, it had some problems. One of my top 3 career options was an IRS employee, based on the fact that I was honest, and stayed within the law. It allowed no gray areas whatsoever.

I would have been the kindest, most excusing, and non prosecutorial IRS agent ever. The test only tested, black and white, want to guess what type of person invented it?

[FormerOstrich]

40. My take on the test was....

that it illustrated natural tendencies and help to understand different approaches. I thought it's best purpose was to help understand there is much gray, that others that were not like yourself were not "wrong" and you were not "right".

The test indicated you were honest and stayed within the law...so those traits are good in an IRS employee. But as you pointed out you have other traits that might not make you a good IRS employee. I guess I didn't take it as literal as some.

As far as the retail job I doubt a personality test was the issue. I suspect that it was small-minded middle management that would feel threatened to by hiring anyone that might be more qualified or knowledgeable as their selves. It's a very common thing in middle management (truth be told upper management too). It's a self defeating theory in my mind and I bet they fall into every single category on the MB test.

[TrustingDog]

32. guess you shouldn't wear your 'Fuck Bush' button, eh?

[I_Make_Mistakes]

33. TD

If you are referring to me, I worked there in 95, when the little guy was making a killing in investing. I worked in systems, not brokering or selling. You want to be pissed at somebody, look at CEO's (biggest scum in the pond), for the stock market woes.

I was only worth 1/100 to 1/1000, of the their net worth. Yep, a whole $48.000/yr., with three undergrad degrees. Don't judge, lest you be judged.

[TrustingDog]

34. I wasn't insulting you in any way. i just like to say Fuck Bush

sorry.
hell no I'm not sorry. FUCK BUSH!

[I_Make_Mistakes]

35. TD don't worry

Bush already effed himself. The only solace, it is small, that I get from the current conditions as a Christian, is that Bush, ( there was a movie where Hitler in Hell had a pineapple shoved up his butt everyday) will suffer the same. Oh, did I say, a very large pineapple?

[TrustingDog]

36. Talking about pineapples..

that semi new fundie freak... Warren, the guy with the Ashley Smith connection to his Purpose book.

He wears tropical shirts. Did you notice. I;m trying to figure out the symbolism , cuz There's Always That on BushCo T.V.....

Banana Republic, maybe?

[TrustingDog]

38. delete

just testing. having probs.

[slackmaster]

39. I've been on all three sides of this one, maybe four sides

I feel somewhat qualified to say that the personality testing "industry" is a racket. It gives employers a warm fuzzy feeling and a rationalization to claim that they have taken due diligence in screening job applicants, but the ability of tests like the MMPI and Myers-Briggs to predict actual behavior are limited. That was not even close to what the tests were designed to do.

Pre-employment drug screening (for obvious problems like amphetamines, cocaine, opiates, etc), criminal background checks, and credit reports have far greater value for finding people who pose security risks.

[Trillo]

48. Wouldn't surprise me if this data goes into an aggregator somewhere,

never to be deleted, only insecurely stored (and sold?).

It's so sad that people are so desperate for a job that they'd actually consent to take a test without being paid to do so. I guess it makes sense that people would consent, given that they were forced to take tests for the first 13 years of compulsory school. The system trained all of us that we had no value because we couldn't legally ask to be paid for each test taken.

From the article:
"If we are labeling people liars and thieves even before they have seen any propensity for them to do these things, it is a real injustice,"

Poor people are labeled just that by those 'higher' in the hierarchy. Its the common default. If the poor were trusted, there wouldn't be so much 'security' all over the place.

Nor would there be any tests.

[DBoon]

60. And just imagine what the Department of Homeland Security could do...

All they have to do is buy the test results from the aggregator and they have personality profiles of thousands or millions of people. Every poor sod who went through one of these tests to apply for a job could find these results in the DHS database.

You sign away your rights when you take the tests. If you don't you do not get the job.

Since the data is collected by a private concern it is not subject to government privacy regulations (and since the aggregators aren't financial institutions, GLBA doesn't apply, etc.)

Then the government can go around and buy it and use it for whatever.

[MrPrax]

49. Luxury of PersonalityTesting...

Obvious it would be moot and companies' HR departments wouldn't bother spending the money (cba? on this stuff)if there wasn't such a surplus of bodies for even these crappy low-paying deadend jobs...

Makes you wonder how many companies waste the time and effort here and don't bother to improve their product, their research or the skills of the HR people...

Goes to show that having previous experience is meaningless--why bother with a resume if you have basic skills for unskilled labour...

[Misunderestimator]

50. I had to take one of those once, and I lied whenever my real answer

might be construed as a negative. I passed with flying colors. Stupid, stupid, stupid. :eyes:

[Deja Q]

51. NO FUCKING DUH. This unethical shit has gone on for DECADES.

I couldn't get a job for ages because of this and my work history record when employed, all in all, shows evidence quite the contrary to the garbage those computers spit out.

Some people understandably become unfriendly when they are mistreated too. It's called HUMAN NATURE. Not "answers 5b and 8d" on some punchcard test.

[AngryWhiteLiberal]

53. Corporate executives score high on sociopathy scales...so what's the point

Testing of this sort should be given my trained psychological professionals, not some middle-level HR person.

JB

[Mr.Green93]

56. So that's why security

escorted me out of the testing area.

[DS1]

57. If it weren't for the risk of electrocution, would you

piss on this computer?

Strongly Agree.

I hate those fucking things, they're a goddamn insult

[Blue_Tires]

FWIW:

i also had to take a personality test for employment with Knight-Ridder

[obxhead]

58. if in doubt choose 'B'

Do these tests really get good employee's. If I took one of these I'm sure I would fail,yet I am a good productive worker thast brings value to my company.
If a company only hires based on a test your gonna fib on anyway, then ya probably don't want to work for them anyway.

[davis_islander]

61. What are an applicants rights?

Am I allowed to see the results of the tests? I had to take tons of these for a recent job. I was told I was "borderline" passing. In other words, I failed, but it was up to the person doing the hiring if he wanted to let me skate by. He did. But, now I feel like I have a strike against me at work.

[napi21]

62. These personality test are easy to beat. Just common sense.

I remember having to take a test similar to this in the late 70's. I actually thought it was funny. It of course wasn't computerized then, but all you have to do is asnwer the questions as if you were the employer.

My impression of these test is that they emable employers to hire people who are clever and coniving. It proved to be true for the company I worked for, and they finally decided to discontinue using it.

[Guaranteed]

67. YES.

"My impression of these test is that they emable employers to hire people who are clever and coniving."

VERY insightful. It's actually COUNTER-productive.

[cap]

69. I have taken a couple of these personality tests for myself

and the advice they give is not to rely on one test. Look at a couple tests and see where the consensus is.

[LeftHander]

70. Prozac, Zoloft help you score better on personality tests....

Leveling, calming, happy pills make the American worker more productive.

THX1138....

[Mrs_Beastman]

71. Our dept is getting laid off in July

they have offered us job internally...but the three of us the have taken the test have all failed...now we don't qualify...we just want to know what they are looking for!

[Silverhair]

72. That isn't new. I had to take one almost 30 years ago.

Back when I was working my way through grad school, I took a job as a security guard at a hospital. I had to take an extensive personality test and a polygraph test. I hated both.