I’ve noticed this has become rather common the past few years. Especially as part of the ‘interview’ process. WHY? I don’t mean to disparage H.R as a profession, but why do you people waste our time with this bunk? Even worse is when it’s done in liue of actual work as a ‘team building exercise’. Well at least you’re getting paid in that context. A few years ago, I didn’t even get to speak to the hiring manager because of the results of the Keirsey test. :rolleyes:
Why don’t you just take the full plunge and hire Miss Cleo or Dionne Warwick to give applicants a psychic reading?
I went to the official Keirsey page and took the free test. When I got the results, it felt like I was reading a horoscope - general and vague with only a few things fitting the bill.
That reminds me of an episode of The Drew Carey Show. He interviewed a woman for a position, and she was obviously well-qualified and professional and ideal for the position. He said, “The rules say I have to give you this psychological test. So here’s the test . . . and here are all the answers to it.” (handing her two sheets of paper).
Well- MB is a bit more accurate than horoscpes. As I have posted before, I have “tested” both MB and horoscopes. If you read someones personality tyep, but use the opposites type instead, you’ll get knowing nods, “yes” and various agreement noises for astrology. For MB, you get mostly confused noises and disagreements. BUT, that’s for the opposite. If you read “one over” for MB, you still get knowing nods, “yes”, and various agreement noises.
So, it’s a rough guide but it’s hardly an exact science.
It is a ‘personality type’ test. It divides people into “Introspective Counseler” or “Guardian Provider” type. I had an interview working in the Network Operations center at a Telco that rhymes with ‘Horizon’. I had about 5 years experience in this type of job. I had to take a ‘technical knowledge’ test and then a ‘personality test’. The HR person came back and said “your technical knowlege is right in line with what we need but your personality profile test doesn’t match our criteria” I shit you not. No chance to even speak with a manager in the NOC.
My irritation is that this practice is becoming more and more common. And when you are in need of a job, prepare yourself for an interview and then spend an hour taking a ‘personality test’ consisting of questions like:
Strict observance of the established rules is likely to prevent a good outcome
YES NO
It’s difficult to get you excited
YES NO
It is in your nature to assume responsibility
YES NO
You often think about humankind and its destiny
YES NO
only to be told you dont get an interview because your “type” is wrong.
The job was working in a fishbowl watching a network and testing circuits and such. Why am I being asked about ‘humanity’s destiny’?
But back to the question. Why is this type of thing done? In the example I gave, the job does not require a genius, but it was also not a ‘cattle call’ type job where anyone off the street could do it. It paid around $20.00 an hour and needed people with somewhat specific knowledge.
Anyway it was 2 years ago and it was the first time I had been on a job search since the around 1998 and just thought it was stupid. I’m horrified to think what job hunting must be like at the moment.
It is rubbish. As far as I can tell, HR people are willing to do anything to match candidate qualifications and job requirements - except the hard work involved in understanding either.
Chances are your HR person had only the slightest clue what the job entailed, nor did he understand half of all the hard words in the resume. What he does know is that he’s charged with getting 80% of the resumes in the stack thrown out, and pretending that poor grammar makes you a bad tech doesn’t let him drop that many. So he runs a pseudo-para-kinda-scientific test - that way, everybody can pretend that some sort of relevant procedure was used - after all, what qualifications do you have to contradict the Plekksy-Gladss test?
it’s supposed to establish, among other things, whether you’ll be a good cultural fit. Of course, it’s just bogus junk science bullshit built on dubious nonsense. Target does this shit like crazy, and within the company it’s a cultlike atmosphere of team-player drones-- which is probably what they wanted when they started doing this garbage.
I think the MBTI is a valuable tool for some purposes, but, as an HR person, would never use it as a selection tool. It’s not valid for selection. I picture it being used in a company where management says something like “I need all my salespeople to be extroverts. Make it so!” Good HR people don’t like working for management like that.
Took the test. That thing is so vague as to be useless. I’m voting with Spiny Norman. The test gives someone an excuse to reject you without giving, say, the real reason. Like, “I don’t like your face.”
Well, I think it might work for weeding people based on personality, but I don’t believe it works in establishing the optimal work environment or the optimal mix of employees.
What about the introvert who is good at sales because he can answer in-depth questions from his clients?
If you ask a person to drive to your location, take your silly tests, shouldn’t they at least have 10 minutes with the hiring manager? (Assuming the resume indicates no ones time is being wasted?)
LOL, I’ve been subjected to the same BS type of a test. It wasn’t used as a hiring qualification at the time, although it is now. Interesting, they came up with different names for the 4 quadrants. “Guardian” was “Commander” and I don’t remember what the other 3 quadrants were.
I remember my results came back indicating that I thought the test was BS.
I still think all these tests are BS and I’d rather the company spend the money on a private jet for the CEO.
I can never get these things right. Maybe I think too much.
Well, that depends very much on whether the “established rules” are good or not. Nazi concentration camp=>bad outcome. Olympics=>good outcome. War criminal or gold metalist. Genius (Einstein) or juicer (Marion Jones).
Excited about what? Excited about doing the work=>good. Excited about having to do the work=>bad. I just work hard and accomplish a lot every day–nothing exciting. I get really excited when they actually expect me to come to work on time and actually do anything!
:dubious: