Table of Contents
Title Page
Abstract
Chapter 1: Introduction 3
· Purpose of the Study 4
· Thesis Statement 4
Chapter 2: Literature Review 5
· Personality Traits 5
· Personality Questionnaire: Development & Quality Factors 7
· Personality Questionnaire: Empirical Studies 10
Chapter 3: Aspect of Personality Questionnaire 16
· Choice of Questionnaire 17
· Evaluation of Questionnaire 17
· Issues 20
Chapter 4: Methodology 22
· Overview 22
· Research Design 23
· Participants 28
· Instruments 29
· Data Processing and Analysis 31
· Ethical Considerations 32
Chapter 5: Findings 32
· Overview 32
· Demographic Profile 33
· Survey Results 35
· Discussion 37
Chapter 6: Positive Synthesis 53
· Quality 54
· Advantage 57
· Disadvantage 65
Chapter 7: Conclusion 68
References 71
Appendix A: Questionnaire 77
Abstract
There had been a number of researches that investigated on the function of personality questionnaire in employee recruitment and appraisal. This study was then conducted in order to identify other important aspects of personality tests as a tool for conducting different human resource procedures. Specifically, this research aimed to identify the role and reliability level of personality questionnaires based on the perspectives of selected HR personnel. Advantages and disadvantages of personality tests were also identified. To gather the needed data, a survey questionnaire was used. Weighted means were computed to analyze the answers of the participants. The results showed that the respondents agree that personality questionnaire is capable of identifying various personal attributes an ideal employee must have. This in turn benefits the company as it enables them to align attributes with specific job specifications. This also helps in reducing employee’s turnover rate, resolving workplace conflicts and enhancing productivity. Nonetheless, respondents also agree that the accuracy of the scores obtained from the test results is difficult to ensure considering that the applicants could easily fake their answers. Moreover, legal and discriminatory issue had been correlated to this recruitment tool. As stated from literatures, these finding clearly emphasizes the need for personality test users to ensure the reliability and validity of the questionnaires. Items that point to discrimination should be taken out. Furthermore, outcomes of employee’s recruitment and appraisal can be more successful by combining personality tests with other tools for employment.
Chapter 1: Introduction
The idea of personality traits may be as old as human language itself. (384–322 BC), writing the Ethics in the fourth century BC, saw dispositions such as vanity, modesty and cowardice as key determinants of moral and immoral behaviour. He also described individual differences in these dispositions, often referring to excess, defect and intermediate levels of each. His student (371–287 BC) wrote a book describing thirty 'characters' or personality types, of which a translator remarked that Theophrastus’ title, might better be rendered 'traits' (, & , 1993). Basic to his whole enterprise was the notion that individual’s good or bad traits or character may be isolated and studied separately.
Studies of human performance provide one of the prime methods for investigating associations between traits and objective indices of behaviour. This concept had led to the development of personality tests, which has long been useful for employees especially in screening out job applicants. For example, in some airlines, personality questionnaires are used to screen out applicants who may be vulnerable to mental illness ( & , 1989). Specific types of tests like the Big Five model have become increasingly popular as a selection and assessment guide in occupational studies of personality (, 1997). Many different traits, both broad and narrow, have been studied in relation to performance. These studies in turn had been used by companies or employers to assess their applicants and ensure that their employees will benefit the organization.
Purpose of the Study
This research was conducted in order to critically evaluate and examine the status and role of personality questionnaire in the selection, retention and recruitment of employees. This paper explores how personality questionnaire can identify the different abilities and behaviours of job applicants. The role, benefits and downsides of using personality questionnaires are also discussed in this study. The conduction of this research is likely to benefit both the employers and applicants. Specifically, this study highlights the important points that employers must consider in order to use personality questionnaires effectively. On the other hand, this paper helps an applicant obtain a clearer understanding on the purpose of taking personality tests.
Thesis Statement
The researcher aimed to address the following research questions:
Chapter 2: Literature Review
In this chapter, focus is on various relevant literatures that explain the concept of personality traits as well as the use of personality questionnaires.
Personality Traits
One of the pioneering trait psychologists, (1937), saw traits as organized mental structures, varying from person to person, which initiate and guide behaviour. There are two important qualifications of this general principle. First, as and (1993) pointed out, the explaining of behaviour requires different levels of analysis, including genetics, physiology, learning and social factors. 's notion that all the various manifestations of traits can be explained at a single level of 'mental structure' is simplistic. Hence, causal models of trait action will vary depending on the level investigated, although the ultimate research aim is to develop a trait theory that will connect various levels. Second, the causal effects of traits on behaviour may be indirect. Traits interact with situational factors to produce transient internal conditions or states, which may sometimes be a more direct influence on behaviour than the trait. For example, trait anxiety may interact with an immediate situational threat to generate transient state anxiety, which in turn disrupts ongoing information processing and impairs performance (, 1966).
Tendency to experience negative emotions are assumed by some to relate to some fundamental, core quality of the person, which might be influenced substantially by genetic factors (, 1967; ., 2000). Again, even within theories that are sympathetic to the traditional view of traits, there has been some modification of the basic view. For example, and (1977) distinguished 'surface' traits, which are simply clusters of overt responses which tend to be associated, from 'source' traits, which are deeper properties of the person with causal effects on behaviour. Modern developments of traditional theory seek to identify and explain underlying sources of consistency in behaviour, whether these are conceived as genetic, physiological or cognitive in nature. The process of relating operationally defined measures such as questionnaire scores to theory is often referred to as construct validation.
Both assumptions of traditional trait theory—their causal primacy and inner locus—have been challenged more radically. The alternative to causal primacy is the view that traits a construction with no independent causal status. For example, and (1983) argued that traits are simply descriptions of natural categories of acts. and (1987) characterized traits as conditional statements of situation—behaviour contingencies. Furthermore, traits may be jointly constructed by two or more people in social interaction, according to the social dynamics of the situation (, 1988). Social psychological approaches to traits tend also to abandon the inner locus assumption. Even if traits represent genuine psychological structures, these structures may be no more than the superficial mask the person presents to the outside world, in order to present a socially acceptable self-image to other people.
The upshot of this consideration is that there is no generally accepted scientific theory of traits. Some trait theorists have tended to take the relatively easy option of focusing on the dimensional structure and measurement of traits rather than investigating their underlying nature (, 1993). However, it should be clear from the preceding discussion that trait descriptions cannot be accepted at face value, and that there may be various qualitatively different types of explanation for consistencies in self-reports and behaviours. In recent years, progress has been made in developing psychobiological information processing and social psychological trait theories, which are partly complementary and partly competing accounts.
Personality Questionnaire: Development and Quality Factors
Contemporary views of traits are intimately related to the processes of measurement and assessment necessary to identify basic personality dimensions. Typically, the trait researcher has some hypothesis about the number and nature of the principal dimensions, and designs a questionnaire to measure them. Subsequent work investigates how useful a measuring device the questionnaire actually is, and modifies the questionnaire items in response to any shortcomings detected.
The initial development of a satisfactory questionnaire for measuring traits is not easy. Care must be taken in the composition of items: they must be easily understood and unambiguous, applicable to all respondents, and unlikely to cause offense ( & , 1986). There should also be some systematic sampling of the various expressions of personality trait of interest. It is important also to check that items are not strongly contaminated by response sets or biases, such as social desirability, yea-saying or extreme responding. It is also necessary to assess its adequacy formally, by application of psychometrics, the science of psychological measurement. Psychometrics provides statistical techniques which determine the ability level of a particular questionnaire as a measuring tool. The sophistication of modern techniques and the number-crunching power afforded by computers provide the contemporary researcher with powers of data analysis far beyond those envisaged by the pioneering trait researchers.
In order to ensure the efficacy of a personality questionnaire, several factors must be considered. One of which is its reliability. This refers to the accuracy with which the questionnaire measures a given quality. Reliability may be assessed by administering two alternative measures of the trait to a sample of subject and computing the correlation between them. If the correlation is high, the quality can be assessed consistently and the scale is reliable or internally consistent. Otherwise, if the two supposedly equivalent forms are not assessing the same quality, the scale is unreliable and the items must be revised. The alpha statistic is a widely used measure of reliability calculated from a single set of test items. It is, in effect, the correlation of the test with itself. In general, alpha tends to increase both the inter-item correlation and the number of items on the test (, 2001).
Another important factor to consider in personality questionnaires is their stability. Reliability should be distinguished from stability, which is the test— retest correlation of the scale over a given time interval. Personality is expected to change slowly as the person grows older, but it is expected that stabilities of trait measures will be fairly high over periods of a year or more. If the assessor has a scale that is reliable but has a low test—retest correlation, the assessor may be evaluating a mood or some other transient quality of the person, rather than a genuine trait (., 2001).
The third essential factor for a personality questionnaire is validity, which pertains to the tool’s ability to assess what it purports to assess. A scale may be reliable but not valid. For example, a fortune teller might use a highly consistent method for inferring a person's future from the lines on their palm, but the consistency of the technique would be no guarantee that the fortune teller's predictions were accurate. The most straightforward and convincing method for assessing validity is referred to as criterion or predictive validity. The trait measure is correlated with some independent index of a quality associated with the trait. Other external criteria frequently used in personality research include measures of job performance and behaviour, psychophysiological functioning and clinical abnormality (, 1995). Establishing predictive validity is indeed important. The essence of integrating validity is that correlations between the trait and external criteria are predicted in advance from an adequate scientific theory, rather than from common sense or a superficial analysis of trait characteristics. For example, the psychobiological theory of personality can be used to predict how a particular trait should correlate with measures of autonomic functioning, such as heart rate.
Another form of validity is called construct validity. This arises out of the total web of empirical data and theoretical analysis, which builds up around a trait, sometimes referred to as its nomological network (, 1981). The difficulties of construct validity are those of establishing scientific truth. Even 'good' theories are never fully satisfactory, and require periodic modification of hypotheses and concepts as new research findings are obtained (, 1976). Hence, construct validity is always somewhat provisional, and may be reduced or enhanced by fresh research.
Personality Questionnaire: Empirical Studies
There had been a number of studies related to personality questionnaires and its ability to detect various personal attributes. In one research, (1977) asked subjects to rate and describe their positive and negative emotions, impulses, behaviour and situations for over two weeks. Although the correlation between single days was as low as suggested by the work of (1968) and (1972, the reliability of measures in each of these categories ranged from 0.40 to 0.88, with a median of 0.72 when odd and even days were correlated for data collected for between twenty-four and thirty-four days. Another message of this study was that, in all of the above categories, a certain minimum frequency of occurrence and variance was required to achieve high reliability, whether it was between behaviour and emotions. reckoned that, given the frequent assertion that there is a 0.30 barrier for cross-situational reliability coefficients; the findings of this study are no less than dramatic.
Personality, behaviour, and even situations as scored by judges independent of the subjects, were all highly reliable when aggregated over several days; the low predictive validity coefficients claimed by the situationists for personality variables were imposed by error of measurement as the result of single observations. Therefore, the procedure those others have all employed but guarantees reliability coefficients to be low. It may be concluded that those who have argued that personality is unstable have simply not used procedures that can establish its stability. As (1981) pointed out, aggregation of data actually provides quite good evidence for cross-situational consistency in studies such as that of and (1928) which purport to show situation specificity of behaviour. Similarly, when personality is assessed through judges' ratings, large numbers of behavioral observations may be needed for the behavioral consistency and predictive validity of traits to appear ( & , 1982).
(1988) studied the reliability of ratings and behaviour counts of friendliness and dominance in forty-three subjects who visited a laboratory on six occasions in order to conduct a problem-solving exercise with one partner. Correlating ratings (inferred traits) of friendliness and dominance made in one situation with only one other situation gave coefficients of 0.26 and 0.12, respectively; both were non-significant, but of the order expected from the criticisms of . The same analyses performed on behaviour counts gave coefficients of 0.37 (p < 0.05) for friendliness and 0.06 for dominance. However, when generalizability (using coefficient alpha) was calculated using the six situations, the ratings values for friendliness and dominance were 0.68 (p < 0.001) and 0.44 (p < 0.01), respectively. The value for behaviour counts for friendliness was 0.78 (p < 0.001) and for dominance, 0.28 (ns). She concluded that there were high levels of cross-situational generality for behaviour count and ratings measures of friendliness (aggregated over six laboratory situations), and moderate levels of generality for ratings of dominance.
Further, using data from only five situations to predict friendliness ratings or behaviour counts in a single situation, multiple R values of 0.50 and 0.57 were obtained for ratings and behaviour counts, respectively (both p < 0.01). For dominance, the expression of relevant behaviour was affected by whether the subject knew the partner they were with in the situation. The use of abstract qualities such as friendliness also seems to raise behavioral consistency. and (1991) showed cross-situational consistencies typically of 0.4–0.6 for behaviour coded by meaning, but substantially smaller consistencies for specific instances of behaviour. For example, 'humour' is more consistent than 'joke-telling'.
Other later works on personality tests made use of trait constructs to predict behaviors with remarkable success. Researchers used behavioral dispositions in a particular way—one that takes the context into account and may be seen as a form of interactionism ( & , 1987). As an alternative to theories that see traits as causal agents or as mere summaries of observed behaviors (e.g. & , 1983), sees a trait statement as the 'conditional probability of a category of behaviors in a category of contexts'. It is hard to imagine any trait theorist taking exception to this definition, and the present authors consider it to be a good, mainstream definition of a trait, stripped of beliefs about the origin of the trait. In particular, the point that traits most reliably express themselves in situations that are suited to their expression is accepted by most, if not all, personality trait theorists. That is, it is difficult to express extraversion whilst marching with other soldiers in a parade, but much easier to express it at a party. What is remarkable about and colleagues' research is the care with which it is formulated and executed, and the high level of predictive validity that it provides for personality traits from this once champion of situationism.
In a study, and (1987) asked raters to assess children on the traits of 'aggression' and 'withdrawal'. Several different observers watched the children's actual behaviors over a period of time. The raters were also asked to judge how demanding the situation was for the child, in comparison to the child's competence. The hypotheses were complex: those children with high levels of trait would show more behaviour that were central to that trait (feature-centrality), and that correlations between traits and behaviors would be especially high if the situation was demanding for the child. Feature-centrality needs explanation: with regard to aggression, 'feature-central' behaviour would be a threat issued to another child. The feature-central threatening behaviour would be expected to show higher correlations with aggression than with a non-feature-central trait such as distractibility.
As hypothesized, children with given levels of a trait showed more trait-relevant behaviors. The correlations are especially strong when the demand level of the situation is high, and when the rated behaviour is central to the trait concept, although correlations are substantial for feature-central behaviors even in low-demand situations. Ratings of traits made by others do predict objectively observed behaviors. and 's study is a success for trait theory, situationism and interactionism all at once: traits were highly predictive of behaviors, the relevance of the situation made a difference to the behavioral scores, and there was also a significant trait—situation interaction. Thus, highly aggressive children displayed more overall feature-central behaviors such as pushing and shoving, which further increased as the demands of the situation rose.
This model of interactionism has continued to develop, and and his colleagues have conceptualized personality as a dynamical system ( and , 1995; , , & , 2002). The authors' Cognitive Affective Personality System (CAPS) describes affects, goals, expectancies, beliefs, competencies, and self-regulatory plans and strategies as the basic units of personality. The outcome of these interacting units is typically of if…then… form: e.g., if you encounter someone you know then behave in a friendly manner. The individual's repertoire of if—then connections provide a unique behavioral signature or profile for that person. Typically, these outcomes are then highly contextually dependent: e.g., showing friendly behaviour towards acquaintances, but not to strangers or work colleagues. Nevertheless, the model assumes some personality stability that produces consistency in how the individual behaves in specific situations. As with trait models, it assumes personality develops from both biological and cognitive-social influences, a point to be elaborated in subsequent chapters.
and (2001) studied person by situation interactions by asking subjects to describe themselves in 'if—then' terms ('I am…. when….') after they had performed a task for which they were given either positive or negative feedback. In doing so, the subjects were less likely to put themselves on extreme ends of dimensions (as they might using standard personality inventories), and less likely to misattribute—or overgeneralize—success or failure to themselves, rather than to the specific situation. In addition, the 'if—then' framework also reduced the likelihood that subjects would attribute reasons for others' behaviour to stereotypes. This 'dynamical system' has also been modeled using computer simulations in the same terms; this idea is borne out in applied fields of research, too. For example, while behaviors in certain crime situations are consistent across individuals, people's traits alone do not predict criminal involvement (., 2002). Other studies have also shown that 'driver stress' is predicted from situational factors such as traffic congestion and time pressure of the journey (, & , 2000), together with dispositional stress vulnerabilities that are specific to driving (, 2002).
Chapter 3: Aspects of Personality Questionnaire
This chapter concentrates on the different aspects of personality questionnaire. Specifically, focus will be on the choice, evaluation and issues related to the use of personality questionnaires.
Choice of Questionnaire
There is a wide array of published trait questionnaires that are potentially relevant to certain human resource needs. Personality questionnaires range from those that aim to assess general qualities, such as measures of the Big Five to those that measure more narrowly drawn traits that may be critical in certain situations. There are no definite rules for choosing between the different questionnaires. However, it is essential that the user of these personality questionnaires have a clear objective as to what the test should assess or measure. The goal of using personality tests helps in limiting the choices of questionnaire the user can apply and ensure that useful results are obtained.
Evaluation of questionnaires
There are some well-established benchmarks that may be used for evaluating the questionnaires. One of which is reliability, referring to whether repeated measurements will give similar questionnaire scores. However, a questionnaire may be reliable for the wrong reasons. The user must ensure that questionnaire items do not increase the tendency for biases. The validity of the questionnaire is also an important factor for assessing the quality of a personality test. In evaluating personality tests it is important that the questionnaire possesses good reliability, stability and validity. If it has subscales, their differentiation should be supported by factor analysis. Evaluation of internal consistency (i.e., reliability) and stability over time is straightforward. Generally, researchers take a reliability value of 0.7 as the minimum for research use, although 0.8 or more is preferable. Individual assessment requires a reliability of 0.9 or better. Determining factor structure may raise technical issues such as the nature of the factor structure to be used, although, if the factor structure is robust, choice of analytic method should have minor effects only.
Assessment of validity may be a little more complex, as I will now discuss. As previously discussed, the key element of validity is criterion validity–the ability of the questionnaire to predict meaningful criteria such as emotional states, abnormal behaviors and job performance. Criterion validity has two main aspects. These include the concurrent (present) and predictive (future) validity. Both aspects can be useful; for instance, the clinician may want an index of current behavioral disturbance, while the personnel manager needs to predict future job performance, following training. In any case, the validity coefficient expresses how strongly the trait predicts the criterion; the trait may not be of much practical use if the coefficient is too low. It is also important to establish whether the validity coefficient generalizes across different contexts; it is dangerous to assume that a single study establishes validity, even if the coefficient is high.
Face validity is the least important of the remaining aspects of validity, although lack of face validity may sometimes alienate respondents. Content validity is especially important in the early stages of research, before the development of a detailed nomological network that demonstrates the meaning of the construct from its relationships to other indices and behavioral outcomes. Convergent and divergent validity are usually considered together. For example, an extraversion–introversion scale should correlate moderately high with related constructs such as sociability and assertiveness (convergent validity). If it fails to do so, the scale is probably not measuring extraversion. It should also show small correlations with other constructs that are known to be distinct from extraversion, such as neuroticism and intelligence (divergent validity).
Establishing divergent validity is especially important in developing scales for new constructs, which, all too often, turn out to be similar to existing ones. Incremental validity is related to divergent validity. It refers to tests of whether the scale predicts criteria if other constructs correlated with both the scale and the criterion are statistically controlled, typically using partial correlation or multiple regressions. If I had a new scale for stress vulnerability, incremental validity would be demonstrated if the scale predicted anxiety symptoms with neuroticism and extraversion controlled, for example. Finally, construct validity refers to the often elusive theoretical basis for the trait, and its psychological meaning. The relevance of theory to the practitioner varies according to the nature of the practical problem. Sometimes, prediction proceeds on an actuarial basis. That is, if it is known that a battery of scales predicts performance on some job (with good validity generalization); the scales can be used for personnel selection without too much concern about the theory. However, this approach is often negated by the existence of moderator variables, that is, additional variables that influence the association between the trait scale and the criterion. For example, correlations between traits and job performance depend critically on factors such as the nature of the work, the stressfulness of the work environment, and the level of stimulation or arousal it affords. Although the influence of moderator variables can be mapped out empirically, prediction is enhanced when the user can utilize theory to determine when a trait is or is not likely to be predictive.
Issues
The user of psychometric tests is, of course, bound by the same ethical principles as any other psychologist. and (1997) discuss some misuses of tests, which would be contraindicated by the APA code. Naturally, it is unethical to use professionally a test whose validity has not been established. Even if the test has been systematically developed, problems may arise when there is no clear criterion for the construct that is assessed, and when tests are interpreted on the basis of common sense or the tester's personal insights. Such problems are often more acute for projective tests than for trait measures. More subtly, tests that are valid for one purpose may be misused in a different context. and pointed out that tests developed for use in psychiatric settings such as the Rorschach and MMPI may not be suitable as selection devices in industry, especially when administered by people with no clinical training. Several countries, including the UK, have formal systems for accrediting test users to counter such problems.
Ethical obligations are discharged within a legal framework, which, of course, differs from nation to nation, and, in the USA, from state to state. Laws typically deal with issues such as confidentiality and data protection, protection of privacy, and fairness in occupational selection. Naturally, the practitioner requires familiarity with such laws, especially in an increasingly litigious society. If a trait assessment is a factor on a job applicant for not being hired or promoted, the psychologist may have to justify the relevance of the trait in court. Occasionally, legal decisions may seem capricious. In 1996, the police force of New London, Connecticut, obtained some notoriety for refusing employment to an applicant whose mental ability was deemed too high (corresponding to an IQ of about125). The police department successfully argued in court that applicants who score too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after receiving costly training.
and (2001) reviewed some legal implications of organizational personality assessment in the USA. They pointed out that personality measures may be less vulnerable than mental ability tests to the perception that they are unfair to minority applicants. Indeed, they quote a statement made by Hogan et al. (1996, ):
“… we want to suggest in the strongest possible terms that the use of well-constructed measures of normal personality in pre-employment screening will be a force for equal employment opportunity, social justice, and increased productivity.”
and (2001) pointed out two unresolved problems in line with the use of personality questionnaire within the occupational field. First, although fakers may be identified as having very high scores on desired traits, rejecting a job applicant because they score too highly might be difficult to justify legally. Second, the well-replicated sex differences in some personality traits lead to conflict between legal and scientific principles. The use of score adjustments or differential cut-offs in the use of employment-related tests, on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin was made unlawful by the US Civil Rights Act. This is implemented primarily to prevent racial discrimination. However, it is normal and scientifically justified practice in personality assessment to use separate norms for men and women, a procedure that in fact promotes fairness in occupational selection. It remains to be seen how this issue will play out in future court cases.
Chapter 4: Methodology
Overview
This research was conducted in order to determine whether personality questionnaire play a significant role in the recruitment and appraisal of the employees. The advantages and disadvantages as well as the reliability of this instrument were also part of the objectives. In order to answer these research goals, the researcher opted to obtain the view of human resource employees in line with this topic. Specifically, a total of 60 respondents from 10 companies within London were randomly selected to make up the sample. Selected participants answered a survey questionnaire structure in Likert format. Data gathered from this research instrument were then computed for interpretation. Along with primary data, the researcher also made use of secondary resources in the form of published articles and literatures to support the survey results.
Research Design
The descriptive method of research was used for this study. To define the descriptive type of research, (1994) stated that the descriptive method of research is to gather information about the present existing condition. The emphasis is on describing rather than on judging or interpreting. The aim of descriptive research is to verify formulated hypotheses that refer to the present situation in order to elucidate it. The descriptive approach is quick and practical in terms of the financial aspect. Moreover, this method allows a flexible approach, thus, when important new issues and questions arise during the duration of the study, further investigation may be conducted.
Descriptive research on the other hand is a type of research that is mainly concerned with describing the nature or condition and the degree in detail of the present situation. This method is used to describe the nature of a situation, as it exists at the time of the study and to explore the cause/s of a particular phenomenon. The aim of descriptive research is to obtain an accurate profile of the people, events or situations. With this research type, it is essential that the researcher already has a clear view or picture of the phenomena being investigated before the data collection procedure is carried out. The researcher used this kind of research to obtain first hand data from the respondents so as to formulate rational and sound conclusions and recommendations for the study. The descriptive approach is quick and practical in terms of the financial aspect.
In this study, the descriptive research method was employed so as to identify the role and significance of using personality questionnaire in recruiting and selecting employees during the time of research. The researcher opted to use this research method considering the objective to obtain first hand data from the respondents. The descriptive method is advantageous for the researcher due to its flexibility; this method can use either qualitative or quantitative data or both, giving the researcher greater options in selecting the instrument for data-gathering. The aim of the research is to determine the role of personality questionnaire in human resource processes as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using psychometric testing in the recruitment and appraisal of employees; the descriptive method is then appropriate for this research since this method is used for gathering prevailing conditions.
The research is using human resource management employees as respondents from ten companies in London in order to gather relevant data; the descriptive method is then appropriate as this can allow the identification of the similarities and differences of the respondents’ answers. For this research, two types of data were gathered. These included the primary and secondary data types. The primary data were derived from the given answers of the participants during the survey process. The secondary data on the other hand, were obtained from published documents and literatures that were relevant to personality questionnaire. With the use of the survey questionnaire and published literatures, this study took on the combined quantitative and qualitative approach of research. By means of employing this combined approach, the researcher was able to obtain the advantages of both quantitative and qualitative approaches and overcome their limitations.
Quantitative data collection methods are centred on the quantification of relationships between variables. Quantitative data-gathering instruments establish relationship between measured variables. When these methods are used, the researcher is usually detached from the study and the final output is context free. Measurement, numerical data and statistics are the main substance of quantitative instruments. With these instruments, an explicit description of data collection and analysis of procedures are necessary. An approach that is primarily deductive reasoning prefers the least complicated explanation and gives a statement of statistical probability. The quantitative approach is more on the detailed description of a phenomenon. It basically gives a generalization of the gathered data with tentative synthesized interpretations.
Quantitative approach is useful as it helps the researcher to prevent bias in gathering and presenting research data. Quantitative data collection procedures create epistemological postulations that reality is objective and unitary, which can only be realized by means of transcending individual’s perspective. This phenomenon in turn should be discussed or explained by means of data analysis gathered through objective forms of measurement. The quantitative data gathering methods are useful especially when a study needs to measure the cause and effect relationships evident between pre-selected and discrete variables. The purpose of the quantitative approach is to avoid subjectivity by means of collecting and exploring information which describes the experience being studied.
Quantitative methods establish very specific research problem and terms. The controlled observations, mass surveys, laboratory experiments and other means of research manipulation in qualitative method makes gathered data more reliable. In other words, subjectivity of judgment, which is not needed in a thesis discussion, can be avoided through quantitative methods. Thus, conclusions, discussion and experimentation involved in the process are more objective. Variables, both dependent and independent, that are needed in the study are clearly and precisely specified in a quantitative study. In addition, quantitative method enables longitudinal measures of subsequent performance of the respondents. (1991) noted that qualitative researchers aim to decode, describe, analyze and interpret accurately the meaning of a certain phenomena happening in their customary social contexts. The focus of the researchers utilizing the framework of the interpretative paradigm is on the investigation of authenticity, complexity, and contextualization, mutual subjectivity of the researcher and the respondent as well as the reduction of illusion.
Contrary to the quantitative method, qualitative approach generates verbal information rather than numerical values ( & , 1995). Instead of using statistical analysis, the qualitative approach utilizes content or holistic analysis; to explain and comprehend the research findings, inductive and not deductive reasoning is used. The main point of the quantitative research method is that measurement is valid, reliable and can be generalized with its clear anticipation of cause and effect ( & , 1994). Being particularistic and deductive in nature, quantitative method is dependent on the formulation of a research hypothesis and confirming them empirically using a specific data set ( & , 1992). The scientific hypothesis of a quantitative method holds no value. This means that the researcher’s personal thoughts, subjective preferences and biases are not applicable in this type of research method.
The researcher opted to integrate the qualitative approach in this study due to its significant advantages. The use of qualitative data gathering method is advantageous as they are more open to changes and refinement of research ideas as the study progresses; this implies that qualitative data gathering tools are highly flexible. Moreover, no manipulation of the research setting is necessary with this method; rather than employ various research controls such as in experimental approaches, the qualitative data gathering methods are only centered on understanding the occurring phenomena in their naturally occurring states. Aside from these advantages, researchers use qualitative data-gathering tools as some previous researchers believe that qualitative data are particularly attractive as they provide rich and well-grounded descriptions and explanations as well as unforeseen findings for new theory construction. One of the notable strength of qualitative instrument is that they evoke a more realistic feeling of the research setting which cannot be obtained from statistical analysis and numerical data utilized through quantitative means. These data collection methods allow flexibility in conducting data gathering, research analysis and interpretation of gathered information. In addition, qualitative method allows the presentation of the phenomenon being investigated in a more holistic view.
Participants
In order to determine whether personality questionnaire does play an important role in conducting human resource processes, a total of 40 respondents were asked to participate. To achieve pertinent information, certain inclusion criteria were imposed. The participants qualified for sample selection must be staff or employees of their respective companies’ human resource department. This qualification ensured that the participants understand the nature of personality questionnaire and its use for employment, making the survey items easy for them to accomplish. The respondents were selected from eight companies in London, thus, a total of five employees were selected in every company; as the study also aimed to determine whether personality questionnaire play an important role in conducting recruitment and appraisal procedures, the researcher did not consider choosing companies that are actually applying this mode of employee selection or evaluation.
Simple random sampling was done for the sample selection. This sampling method is conducted where each member of a population has an equal opportunity to become part of the sample. As all members of the population have an equal chance of becoming a research participant, this is said to be the most efficient sampling procedure. In order to conduct this sampling strategy, the researcher defined the population first, listed down all the members of the population and then selected members to make the sample. For this procedure, the lottery sampling or the fish bowl technique was employed. This method involves the selection of the sample at random from the sampling frame through the use of random number tables (, & , 2003). Numbers were assigned for each employee in the master list. These numbers were written on pieces of paper and drawn from a box; the process was repeated until the sample size was reached.
Instruments
The survey questionnaire was used as the main data-gathering instrument for this study (See Appendix A). The questionnaire was divided into two main sections: a profile and the survey proper. The profile contains socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents such as age, gender, civil status, the number of years they had served the company as well as their assigned job position. The survey proper explored the perceptions of employees on personality questionnaire, particularly on its usability and reliability as an employment selection and appraisal tool. The questionnaire proper section also contains questions that identify the advantages and disadvantages of using personality questionnaires in the department. The questions were structure using the Likert format. In this survey type, four choices are provided for every question or statement. The choices represent the degree of agreement each respondent has on the given question. The scale below was used to interpret the total responses of all the respondents for every survey question by computing the weighted mean:
Range Interpretation
3.01 – 4.00 Strongly Agree
2.01 – 3.00 Agree
1.01 – 2.00 Disagree
0.00 – 1.00 Strongly Disagree
The Likert survey was the selected questionnaire type as this enabled the respondents to answer the survey easily. In addition, this research instrument allowed the research to carry out the quantitative approach effectively with the use of statistics for data interpretation. In order to test the validity of the questionnaire used for the study, the researcher tested the questionnaire to five respondents. These respondents as well as their answers were not part of the actual study process and were only used for testing purposes. After the questions have been answered, the researcher asked the respondents for any suggestions or any necessary corrections to ensure further improvement and validity of the instrument. The researcher revised the survey questionnaire based on the suggestion of the respondents. The researcher then excluded irrelevant questions and changed vague or difficult terminologies into simpler ones in order to ensure comprehension.
Data Processing and Analysis
After gathering all the completed questionnaires from the respondents, total responses for each item were obtained and tabulated. In order to use the Likert-scale for interpretation, weighted mean to represent each question was computed. Weighted mean is the average wherein every quantity to be average has a corresponding weight. These weights represent the significance of each quantity to the average. To compute for the weighted mean, each value must be multiplied by its weight. Products should then be added to obtain the total value. The total weight should also be computed by adding all the weights. The total value is then divided by the total weight. Statistically, the weighted mean is calculated using the following formula:
or
Ethical Considerations
As this study required the participation of human respondents, specifically human resource professionals, certain ethical issues were addressed. The consideration of these ethical issues was necessary for the purpose of ensuring the privacy as well as the safety of the participants. Among the significant ethical issues that were considered in the research process include consent and confidentiality. In order to secure the consent of the selected participants, the researcher relayed all important details of the study, including its aim and purpose. By explaining these important details, the respondents were able to understand the importance of their role in the completion of the research. The respondents were also advised that they could withdraw from the study even during the process. With this, the participants were not forced to participate in the research. The confidentiality of the participants was also ensured by not disclosing their names or personal information in the research. Only relevant details that helped in answering the research questions were included.
Chapter 5: Findings
Overview
This research was conducted in order to determine the reliability and role of personality questionnaire in various human resource activities in recruitment and employee appraisal. In addition, this study also aimed to identify the advantages and disadvantages of using personality questionnaires. In order to answer these research questions, the descriptive method of research was applied. Through quantitative and qualitative approaches, the researcher developed a questionnaire that would gather pertinent data. Literatures to support the findings were also integrated. The answers given by the 40 selected respondents were then analyzed by computing their weighted mean. Results were then presented in graphs and tables to facilitate the analysis.
Demographic Profile
For the profile of the respondents, the questionnaire asked for the participants’ age, gender, duration of service in the company and their current job position. Below are the graphs summarizing the gathered values for each profile category:
Fig. 1: Age Distribution of the 60 Respondents
Fig. 2: Gender Distribution of the 60 Respondents
Fig. 3: Duration of Service of the 60 Respondents to their respective companies
Fig. 4: HR Positions of the Selected Respondents
Survey Results
Below is the table summarizing the results of the survey responses given by the selected participants:
Usability and Reliability of Personality Questionnaire
4
3
2
1
Weighted Mean
Interpretation
1. Based on existing workforce and human resource
5
12
19
4
2.45
Agree
developments in your company, personality questionnaire
has the ability to provide accurate results.
2. Personality questionnaire is able to give objective
13
16
9
2
2.60
Agree
findings that enable less personal recruitment decisions.
3. The results of the personality questionnaire are easy to
14
18
8
0
3.15
Strongly Agree
analyze and interpret.
4. Personality questionnaire supports fast hiring
17
23
0
0
3.43
Strongly Agree
procedures.
5. Personality questionnaire contributes greatly to
8
24
8
0
3.00
Agree
company performance and output
Pros and Cons of Personality Questionnaire
4
3
2
1
Weighted Mean
Interpretation
6. Personality questionnaire helps in determining whether
5
23
12
0
2.83
Agree
the applicant is fit for the job or not.
7. The use of personality questionnaire is advantageous
13
16
9
2
2.60
Agree
as it can easily identify the individual's potentials, behaviour
and work attitudes.
8. Personality questionnaires demand several
32
8
0
0
3.80
Strongly Agree
requirements such as trained staff and substantial
experience for effective utilization.
9. The use of a personality questionnaire can help in
8
24
8
0
3.00
Agree
resolving or preventing personality-based conflicts in the
workplace.
10.Personality questionnaire can be administered and
31
9
0
0
3.76
Strongly Agree
analyzed even by untrained staff, making test results
less accurate.
11. This human resource tool promotes team-building
13
16
9
2
2.60
Agree
among employees.
12. Personality questionnaire help employers in making
9
22
8
1
2.98
Agree
effective promotion decisions.
13. The possibility of misinterpretations despite the
38
2
0
0
3.95
Strongly Agree
training is ever-present.
14. The use of a personality questionnaire is useful as it
5
30
5
0
2.25
Agree
is easy to administer.
15. Personality questionnaire is unreliable as applicants
0
3
18
19
1.60
Disagree
may not give the score that truly represents their
personality.
16. Personality questionnaire is relatively cheap.
5
23
12
0
2.83
Agree
17. This human resource instrument resolves issues on
8
24
8
0
3.00
Agree
costs due to high turn over, misemployment and
underperformance of employees.
18. Applicants can easily fake their scores on personality
14
18
8
0
3.15
Strongly Agree
questionnaires, affecting the results of the test.
19. Questions in the personality questionnaire imply
0
4
23
13
1.78
Disagree
discrimination and can subject the company to legal
issues.
20. Personality questionnaire is a highly flexible tool as it
21
19
0
0
3.53
Strongly Agree
can be customized according to the needs of the
company.
Discussion
In this section, the results of the survey are discussed in relation to the objectives of the study. Specifically, the level of reliability/usability as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using personality questionnaires based on the perspective of human resource employees are determined. Some literatures were used to support points raised.
Usability and Reliability of Personality Questionnaire
Based on the results of the survey, the selected participants were able to identify the specific factors that contribute to the personality questionnaire’s usability and reliability. The findings indicated that among the given factors, the respondents believe that personality questionnaire is usable and reliable in terms of its ability to allow easy personality interpretation as well as fast hiring procedures. This identified feature of personality questionnaires is probably attributed to their developed standards that are used for interpreting the results of the test. By means of comparing the answers of the applicant with the developed standards, the human resource staff can easily analyze the personality of the individual and easily categorize him or her to a specific personality type. As these personality types correspond to the individual’s attitude and capability, the human resource staff can tell whether the applicant is suitable for the job or to the company’s values.
The availability of the standards in personality questionnaires as well as their ability to facilitate ease in recruitment has been demonstrated by a number of companies. A good example is Myers-Briggs indicator, a personality test that has been testing personalities since 1943. The tool has long been used for recruitment and appraisal as it enables fast hiring procedures with less hassle. Specifically, Myer-Briggs allows fast interpretation of results by having a set of standards, which categorize personality into different typologies. Once the applicant has completed the questionnaire, his or her answers are compared to broad personality categories. An example of which is determining whether the individual is an extrovert or an introvert. Other personality categories include thinking or feeling, judging or perceiving and sensing or intuitive (, 2003). By means of these standards of personality categories, human resource personnel can decipher the applicant’s personal aspects, which could affect his or her performance at work. In addition, as personality questionnaire promote fast hiring procedures, cost on recruitment can be reduced as employees can start immediately, enhancing total company performance.
Personality questionnaire is not only useful and reliable in terms of its ability to promote fast and easy recruitment. The respondents of the study also agree that this human resource tool is reliable as it helps in providing accurate results. However, it should also be noted that a number of respondents disagree with this factor. Perhaps, this is significantly related to the different factors that could affect the accuracy of the results and interpretation of personality questionnaires. More details regarding this matter are to be discussed in the next section. Assessing the capability and potentials of an employee based on his or her personality can be subjective in nature; nonetheless, the respondents agree that using the personality questionnaire enable the generation of more objective recruitment decisions. As the interpretation of the results is compared to certain standards, the HR personnel do not really interpret the answers of the applicant based on intuition or personal judgments. Moreover, the standards used for interpreting the results were should have been developed with scientific and psychological knowledge. This then supports the questionnaire’s objectivity.
Finally, the research participants also agree that the personality questionnaire helps in improving the performance and output of their respective companies. Considering that the respondents agree to the ability of the questionnaire to provide accurate and objective hiring results, there is a greater opportunity for the department to employ the right people for the right job. Specifically, the questionnaire helps in discovering the dominant traits, strengths and weaknesses of an applicant; this ability is then used by the HR staff to align the person’s character with the job’s responsibilities and demand. If the employees are assigned to jobs that are suitable to their capabilities, better work outcomes can be produced. Furthermore, this could also facilitate employee motivation. With this feature, personality questionnaire enable the company to achieve a higher degree of productivity.
Based on the overall results given by the respondents, personality questionnaire is a useful and reliable tool for recruitment and appraisal. Not only does this instrument support fast and easy hiring and appraisal procedures, but this also enables the human resource staff to make objective results interpretation. Aside from these, the ability of the personality questionnaire to distinguish a personality type and compare it with the requirements of the job, helps the human resource department in employing applicants that are truly fitted for the vacancy. This in turn makes the questionnaire an important contributor to the company’s performance level and quality of output. It is important to consider, however, that despite the known reliability features of the personality questionnaire, not all respondents are convinced that this can truly be depended on in terms of accuracy. The next section identifies the possible factors that appear to affect the reliability of personality questionnaires.
Pros and Cons of Personality Questionnaire
The results of the survey revealed that personality questionnaire is a two-sided human resource instrument as it has certain advantages and downsides. For easy comprehension, the pros of using personality questionnaire will be identified and analyzed first. From the given advantage factors, the respondents agree that personality questionnaire allows employers to make effective promotion decisions. This is very much related to another advantage indicated by the respondents, which is the reduction of human resource costs due to employee turnover. As employers are able to assess the employees’ attitudes and performance through personality questionnaire, deserving and appropriate people are granted with due promotions.
Granting promotion to deserving employees is one of the important functions and advantages of using the personality questionnaire. (1993) stated that promotion is also synonymous to career success where employees are given higher responsibilities or place on higher authority levels. Promotion is considered an important element of human resource management as it encourages employees to perform with quality. This also represents a significant aspect of the internal selection system. The organizational members’ affective reactions towards their job and to the company are also influenced significantly based on their promotional opportunities. Most importantly, the turnover process is reduced through promotion (., 1993).
Aside from the fact that rapid employee turnover results to significant financial losses, this also works against employee efficiency and productivity. As the morale of the employees are reduced considerably due to turnover, profits and quality are eventually affected (, 1995). With effective promotion, employees are likely to be more loyal to the company, thus, preventing employee turnover. A previous study (, 1989) concluded that organizational commitment is positively correlated to internal promotions or career growth; this suggest that promoted employees are likely to have high commitment to the company. The sub-benefits of granting due promotions and preventing high employee turn over all contribute to better company outcomes and performance.
The use of personality questionnaire also results to two other advantages. As indicated by the respondents, this human resource tool also allows the resolution or prevention of workplace conflicts as well as promote team-building among the employees. In the article written by (2004), various firms had stressed the capability of personality tests to maintain the culture of an organization.
With personality questionnaires, companies are able to select participants based on their behaviours, principles and attitudes. If firms will constantly hire employees with personalities that match their standards, an organizational culture is developed. By definition, organizational culture is a manner in which business members are unified by a common standard and goal. The principle of organizational culture states that a certain organization encounters various challenges which the members were able to overcome through established strategies and methods. Hence, organizational culture is commonly defined as the way things are conducted in the company (, 1992).
The features of a personality questionnaire appear to promote the foundations of organizational culture. For instance, values within the corporation serve as the main foundation of organizational culture. The value of the organization serves as its defining elements where symbols, practices, standards and other related matters are derived. Values can be defined as a consistent belief that a certain mode of personal or sociable conduct is preferable against a contradictory mode of conduct. In general, values are considered internalized beliefs which guide individual behaviour ( & , 1982). Through this element of corporate culture, employees are able to establish a social identity which in turn generates meaning and connectedness. This foundation on the other hand, can be achieved through the employment of personality questionnaire.
According to (1997), the organizational culture has basically four essential strengths. The first strength emphasizes its attention on the human side of organizational life. Secondly, it stresses on the importance of harmonious internal relations among the members of the organization, which in turn results to the achievement of common objectives and goals. It also makes the members, especially the organization leaders to assess themselves in terms of the impact they have on the group. Finally, it develops the organization’s relationship not only internally but also externally through the impact of their behaviour on the outside environment.
The organizational culture of the company influences overall behaviour within the workplace. As culture promotes the sharing of a common goal between the top management and the employees, the organization and its multidisciplinary teams naturally works in a more harmonious relationship. As the managers and employees work together, the focus of the workers is no longer concentrated on satisfying their immediate supervisors. Rather, they work to satisfy the needs of the other teams in the process. This dynamic motion within the organization gives a more defined role and purpose for each team. Since the teams are held together, their actions are more coordinated. With organizational culture, both the managers and the employees are extremely involved in a constant joint effort to enhance the quality of the firm’s products or services at every level. This then involves an impact similar to that of a chain reaction in which, the united goal of the organization to improve its services will eventually enhance their customers’ satisfaction and minimize the firm’s total costs. In addition, organizational culture increases the employees’ sense of pride and self-worth. Hence, organizational culture positively influences the organizational behaviour, which makes work teams perform more efficiently (, 2001).
The reliability of personality questionnaire in promoting high levels of company performance and output appear to be related to the creation of culture within the organization. A number of authors and theorists have identified the relation between organizational culture and corporate performance ( & , 1999). (1990) for example, has identified considerable correlations between culture and organizational performance, emphasizing on human resources and decision-making practices. Researchers and (1995) also cited that organizational culture is related with involvement, adaptability, mission and adaptability, which in turn allow return on assets and sales growth.
Another significant effect of organizational culture is its ability to enable the acquisition of new skills. It also promotes employee in familiarization with the overall operation of the business. In other words, organizational culture facilitates the generation of well-rounded employees who are well-equipped and capable of providing newer or better business solutions. The involvement and participation of the employees help in creating team orientation and organizational efficacy. Organizational efficacy is defined as a generative capability found in an organization so as to effectively overcome various challenges, stressors, opportunities and demands most businesses encounter within its environment. Organizational efficacy exists as a combined judgment of the individual members of the organization regarding their sense of joint capacities, their sense of purpose, direction or mission as well as their sense of resilience (, 2001). Basically, organizational efficacy refers to the strong sense of self-belief that one can do something to stand out, excel and make a difference. Hence, oftentimes, organizational efficacy is used interchangeably with organizational confidence. This effect is also among the most important advantages brought about by the establishment of organizational culture.
The respondents also agree on other advantages of using personality questionnaires. As mentioned in the reliability section, the respondents noted the ability of this human resource instrument to identify the potentials, attitudes and behavior of the applicant. This feature helps the HR staff to determine whether the individual is suitable for the job being offered. In addition to these advantages, the respondents also indicated that employing this type of test for HR processes is less costly. Most importantly, personality questionnaires are highly flexible, meaning companies can easily customize them in accordance to their employment needs.
In line with the ability of personality tests to identify the applicants’ personal features, some literatures had recognized this important advantage. In one article from the (2001), personality questionnaires were described as tools that are initially used to identify applicants with potential psychological problems. However, currently, these instruments are used by employers not only to test the personalities of their applicants but also to align their individual personalities with the needs of the company and the job they are applying for. Rather than screening the applicants based on their mental stability, personality questionnaires are now used to screen applicants for competence; hence, the respondents of the research agree with this capability of personality questionnaires.
The article further explained that with personality questionnaires, companies can prevent employing applicants that could create conflicts in the workplace or bully other co-workers. This is an important issue as bullying in the workplace is among the common problems employees and employers encounter. Some of the usual bullying tactics include criticizing the performance of others, denying accomplishments, making unreasonable demands, blaming others for their own errors, yelling at co-workers, stealing the credit for other’s work as well as insulting colleagues. This concrete example of workplace conflict can be avoided by subjecting incoming employing to personality tests (, 2001). This situation clearly stress the significance of screening employees not only based on their technical skills but their interpersonal skills as well.
According to (2002), the employment of personality questionnaires used to be an expensive and tedious process. Traditionally, the questionnaire would have to be mailed to the applicant; this procedure apparently takes considerable time and energy. However, with the introduction of the Internet and other computer-based programs, companies are able to make the most of personality questionnaires. Not only does this make the entire process faster but companies are able to screen the applicants in a more effective way. As results can be obtained easily through the computer, employers could employ rightful applicants immediately. Considering the strong competition for talented and highly skilled workforce, firms are then able to gain an important advantage in hiring through the personality questionnaire.
Finally, the flexibility of this HR instrument is attributed to its customizable nature. Companies can use personality test in order to assist them in linking personality types to certain job classifications or group of people. The assessment of the applicants personality can also be combined with other forms of tests such as leadership evaluation, skill test or performance assessment. In addition, personality questionnaires has a multi-purpose feature as it cannot only be used for hiring; this can also be utilized for promoting deserving employees, appraising their performance or training (, 2005). This advantage allows firms to develop specific personality questionnaires that are accustomed to what they need from an applicant; this then helps in ensuring that the employees screened through personality questionnaires are suitable for the job vacancy.
Although these findings clearly suggest that personality questionnaires are reliable and advantageous, the selected respondents also pointed out some downsides of this instrument. For instance, the participants strongly agree that the applicants can easily fake the answers they place on the questionnaires. Moreover, there are several personality questionnaires available at present that even untrained staff can easily administer this type of test. The respondents also strongly agree that in order to administer this test effectively, substantial training and experience are necessary. As the interpretation of the test is considerably dependent on the standards and the ability of the HR staff to interpret them, inaccuracy of the results is very possible no matter how much training the HR staffs have gone through.
The tendency to obtain inaccurate personality test results due to the answers provided by the applicants themselves has been raised in the past (, 1994). In particular, a common practice among applicants is to overestimate, especially on positive attributes, their scores in the test. The tendency of applicants to overestimate or fake their scores in a personality test appear to increase when they have an idea on what type of employee the company is seeking. Naturally, if the applicants could easily present the profile they believe the employer requires, the reliability of this instrument is significantly affected. Moreover, despite the accuracy of the HR personnel’s interpretation, there is a great possibility that the wrong employees will be selected with the presence of this issue.
Although the use of personality questionnaires is reliable, the company would have to ensure that its HR department has the people that can administer this effectively. Companies should then assure that their HR employees have undergone appropriate training and have sufficient experience; while the test itself is inexpensive and easy to use, obtaining the right people for its utilization can pose a challenge. Moreover, considering the fact that training and experience alone cannot significantly limit the misinterpretation of results, it is quite difficult to hire and pay for highly skilled HR personnel when positive outcomes are not guaranteed. Thus, rather than insisting on the use of personality questionnaires to various HR procedures, the company is likely to resort to other means of recruitment and employee evaluation.
The validity of the results obtained from personality questionnaires is also doubted. Based from the obtained results, the respondents agree that it could determine the personal features of an applicant, which could help in the hiring process. However, considering the need for trained personnel, the tendency of the applicants to fake their test answers and the risk of misinterpreting the results, the respondents were not totally certain if the results of test are accurate enough. In one newspaper article by (2005), the validity and accuracy of the results obtained from personality tests had been questioned by several critics. Critics noted that one of the main problems with personality questionnaire is that most of these tests are not really meant for hiring purposes. Although the questionnaire can be used to help companies evaluate the employees and build teams among them, these tests cannot really be used to employ people. For instance, if an applicant was identified as shy based on the interpretation of his or her test results; this does not necessarily mean that the individual cannot handle jobs that require an outgoing personality. Thus, a shy individual can be an effective salesperson as the job encourages an outgoing character.
Based from the results obtained from the survey, the use of personality questionnaires has its positive and negative sides. In terms of reliability, the instrument is relatively reliable in determining the personal attributes of an applicant. As the results of the test are easy to analyze and interpret, the speed of hiring and other HR activities is increased. In addition, since the attitudes and behavior of an individual can easily be compared to the developed standards of the test, employer could determine which applicant is most suitable for the job offer. Naturally, as personal features and job requirements are aligned, higher levels of company performance and output are achieved.
These benefits of the personality questionnaire are further supported by its more specific advantages. One of which is the ability of this instrument to assist employers in giving due promotions to deserving employees. As the questionnaire provides the data regarding the employees’ performance, work attitude and behavior, employers can use these as basis for promoting workers. This is an advantage as promotions will not be based on the employers’ intuition only or from personal relations. In addition, giving promotions helps in promoting employee’s loyalty, which contributes to low turn over rates. This then help companies save on significant costs on hiring. Most importantly, the use of personality questionnaires in promoting employees helps the company identify individuals that have great potentials and can contribute significantly to the firm’s future development. Personality questionnaires are also beneficial to the company as it enables the employment of individuals that have more or less similar work principles and attitudes. This in turn helps in promoting teamwork among the employees. By means of having a common direction and value within the company, organizational structure is established. This human resource concept on the other hand, contributes to the development of effective relations between employers and employees as well as among colleagues. With coordination and teamwork, conflicts within the workplace are also prevented or easily settled.
However, the use of personality questionnaires also has its disadvantages. For instance the respondents noted that while this instrument has the capability to identify the personal attributes of an applicant, the accuracy or validity of the results cannot be ascertained. This is mainly because of the tendency of the applicants to fake their test answers in accordance to the profile which they believe is what the employer is looking for. The effective administration of this HR instrument also needs certain requirements including considerable training and experience of the HR staff. As the employment of highly trained HR staff is an investment for the company, it will be difficult for others to have this type of personnel when the outcomes of personality questionnaires cannot be depended on fully. The cited literature also noted the statements of various critics, suggesting that personality questionnaires may be able to categorize people into personality types; however, this cannot be used for hiring procedures. Apparently, the personality implied in the test results does not necessarily connote the capability of an individual. With the individual’s perseverance and sufficient training, an unsuitable applicant may turn out to be a good and dependable employee.
With these findings, one cannot really say that personality questionnaire is very effective; although it has beneficial features, certain negative factors affect the reliability and validity of this tool. There are several implications that can be derived from these findings. One is that the reliability and validity of personality questionnaires is dependent not only on the ability of the HR personnel to make accurate interpretations but also on the questions in the questionnaire. The findings and literatures used in this chapter imply that companies should use questionnaires that had been verified as reliable. Furthermore, while applicants have the tendency to fake their answers in their questionnaire, personality questionnaires can be developed in such a way that fake scores can be prevented. This can be achieved considering that personality questionnaires can be customized.
Chapter 6: Positive Synthesis
The findings derived from primary research clearly indicate that personality questionnaire has a certain degree of reliability. The use of this instrument in hiring and appraising employees can also result to several other advantages. Nonetheless, the downsides of this tool affect its reliability level. In this chapter, more literatures and case examples are discussed in connection to the obtained findings from the survey. This chapter will focus on the quality, advantages and disadvantages of personality questionnaires.
Quality
The obtained findings from the survey indicated that the reliability of personality questionnaire lies considerably on its known ability to determine personal attributes of an individual or applicant. Aside from this, the instrument is also reliable for companies that intend to hasten their hiring processes. Literatures had indicated that these reliability factors of the personality questionnaire are supported by the personality standards used to interpret the test results. Through these standards, personalities can be identified easily and rapidly. A number of researches had already verified the usefulness of personality questionnaires in identifying various personal attributes and its important role in the recruitment practice. For instance, the ability of a personality questionnaire called the Five-factor model in defining job-relevant personality traits such as customer service orientation, pro-activity and integrity has long been recognized. The validity of personality questionnaires within occupational setting had also gone through large meta-analyses where researchers were able to conclude that job-related personalities can be used to predict an individual’s job performance aspects (, & , 1991; & , 1991).
The reliability of personality questionnaires is also supported by a myriad of tried and tested tests used for identifying the personal attributes of the applicants. In a study done using New Zealand companies as sample, the researchers concluded that a considerable number of these organizations use personality tests in their employee selection processes for non-management positions, management positions or both (, & , 2002). Among the most commonly used personality test was & 's Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ). Other selected firms stated other kinds of personality questionnaires including the 16 Personality Factor (16PF), Type Indicator, Adult Personality Inventory, in-house developed tests, the Omnia Environment Compatibility Rating and the Californian Personality Inventory. Some organizations however were not aware which type of personality tests is used for their hiring procedures as the selection is carried out by an external consultant.
In order to understand the role of personality standards in the employment of personality tests, certain examples can be taken into consideration. In the United States, the Type Indicator (MBTI) is the most common personality questionnaire used by companies. This questionnaire attempts to relate an individual’s personality with one of 16 types based on four main traits. During 1940s, and daughter, invented the test based on the original ideas of . While divided personalities into eight different types, and expanded these categories; thus, a total of 16 profiles are now used for the test.
The personality test is basically comprised of 25 questions that aim to identify the person’s style and preference within four dimensions. The first dimension is between extroversion and introversion. This dimension mainly categorizes a person based on the source of his energy. For instance, extroverts derived their energies from the outside world, whereas introverts obtain their energies internally in the form of emotions, ideas and impressions. Stereotypical images of extroverts (talkative) and introverts (quiet) are not enough to define these dimensions. This is because once extroverts have been with people long enough; they have enough energy to be by themselves. In the same way, introverts can be quite talkative in social settings once revved up (, 2003).
Sensing and intuition is the focus of the second dimension. In this case, people categorized as sensors that see what is in front of them; they have a keen sense for catching details and facts. Moreover, they are more interested in past or current events rather than those that will happen in the future. On the contrary, people who are intuitive are those that could pick up on the realities of relationships that surround them. They are quick to realize wider implications of complex matters or explanations. The third dimension is concentrated on thinking and feeling personalities. In this case, the aim is to determine whether the individual is generally ruled by emotion or by reason. Those who are considered as thinkers prefer to be detached, analytical and logical when subjected to a decision-making process. They are basically driven by objectives and are more after clarity and justice. On the other hand, the decisions made by feelers are typically influenced by their emotions and interpersonal involvement in the situation, making decisions more subjective (, 2003).
Finally, the fourth dimension is focused on judging and perceiving qualities of an individual. The judges are the types of people that are very organized, neat and on time. They are the ones who want everything planned ahead of time. The perceivers on the other hand are not as organized as the judges; however, they have a very flexible personality, enabling them to deal with unexpected turn of events. They are very spontaneous and do not plan things in advance. They are not affected either if things do not go as planned. In terms of formulating decisions, both personalities are also different. The judges tend to be quick in making decision and often stick to their initial conclusions; perceivers on the other hand would rather keep their alternatives open as they find it very difficult to make concrete decisions right away (, 2003). Through this personality standards HR staff can easily analyze the answers of the applicant and determine whether he or she can comply with the requirements of the job.
Advantage
One of the identified advantages of employing personality questionnaires is its ability to identify the applicants’ personal attributes in relation to the job being offered. Major companies such as Hewlett-Packard, Pepsi and Sara Lee have made use of personality questionnaires for hiring and management training; the companies themselves confirm that this HR instrument is capable of discovering important employment issues such as the applicants’ experience and credentials. Moreover, as the companies are able to assess the applicant’s aptitudes, character and weaknesses, they are able to assign them to job positions where they are likely to excel and succeed (, 2004). Other than hiring, these companies are also employing personality questionnaires for the training and development of the employees. This function of the personality questionnaire is said to be an important key in enhancing executives and staff that lack certain social skills. Through personality tests, the company is able to give the right feedback that will encourage them to strive harder.
The multi-functionality of personality questionnaires is yet another important advantage of this HR instrument. This feature also enables the flexible nature of personality tests. Recruiting employees is perhaps the most popular purpose of personality questionnaires. As stressed by a manager of a recruitment agency, the use of personality tests allows them to find diamonds in the rough. The recruiters do not initially ask applicants to undergo the test for recruitment. Usually, recruiters would screen applicants; once the applicants pass the initial screening, recruiters will use the personality tests to verify their instincts. In this case, the tests are used to ensure that the judgment of the HR professional is correct; this feature stated then how personality tests can be used for selection, development as well as retention (, 2005).
Recruiting will not be effective if the applicants do not fit to the position being offered. In this case, personality tests are also useful for finding employees with the credentials that suit the job. In some cases, companies use personality questionnaires not to establish a personality pattern within the company but to ensure that each employee can give their best performance to their respective job assignments. Personality questionnaires are also useful in gauging the comfort level of the applicants with job; at times, assessing attitudes of potential applicants can be helpful in adjusting to the job requirements and responsibilities in order to establish a better match (, 2005).
In other companies, personality tests are used not only to strengthen but also to diversify their hiring process. In a group of executives for example, balance should be observed in terms of personalities. Thus, rather than creating a team that is dominated by growth-minded members, executives with personalities that can manage the team should also be included; in this way, a department is not congested with leaders or any other single type personalities. Through a diversified and balanced workforce, companies have higher chances of overcoming future challenges and achieving greater progress (, 2005).
The employment of a diverse workforce and its advantages has been supported by several literatures. Despite of many issues and problems related to workforce diversity, literatures claim that this is an important element of an effective organization as well as provides several advantages (, 1997). According to (1996), the recruitment of a highly diverse workforce is very useful as it provides the organization a larger pool of skills and talents. This also increases the opportunity of the organization to hire employees that are highly appropriate for specific company needs and requirements. In actual company operations, workforce diversity can also help in generating a multitude of useful ideas for decision-making. In other words, workforce diversity broadens the company’s perspectives and increases its options for developing decisions. (1991) noted that the quality of decisions is significantly improved through workforce diversity.
For companies who intend to operate globally, workforce diversity is an important factor. In the marketing aspect, success is more attainable if diverse employees will conduct marketing efforts to ethnic minority and foreign communities (, 1991). Moreover, using locals to handle some of the activities in the organization can help in developing more appropriate international strategies. In general, diversity in the workplace can help organizations in adapting to the challenges of global operations (, 1997). According to (2005), the ability of workforce diversity to combine different perspectives, ideas and cultures together is an important asset that brings forth creativity among the employees. Specifically, the differences in the employees’ experiences, views and education all contribute to the formation of mixture of ideas, allowing the formation of innovative solutions. As this helps in improving organizational performance, some organizations have become increasingly interested in developing a diverse workforce. (1999) has stated that creativity and innovation is achieve in diversity as differences in way of doing and looking at things enable the formation of something that is unexpected. Through this, creativity from workforce diversity will be able to develop products or services that would both please and surprise customers. From this perspective, it becomes apparent that while diversity can result to difficulties, it also opens several avenues of opportunities.
If the company matches the job with the applicants’ personality, it also helps in reducing the turnover rate within the company. Through this advantage, companies are able to reduce hiring and training costs. There had been actual cases where companies were able to achieve reduction in employee turnover rate. In an article written by (2002), the author focused on citing various American restaurants that use personality questionnaires and were able to achieve significant reductions in their employees’ turnover rate. One of these food establishments was Garcia and Pepperoni Grill; its management uses personality questionnaires in screening the applicants. According to the company’s human resource director, with the help of the personality tests, management turnover in the company has dropped from 46% to 25%. Aside from the reduced turnover, the HR director also noted that personality tests are advantageous as it improves management training efforts. It also makes the company more selective with the employees that it hires, ensuring that all applicants who passed fit in the organization.
The respondents of the survey stressed that personality questionnaires does not only reduce the costs due to turnover, but the employment of the test itself is relatively cheaper as compared to other HR tools. Initially, the utilization of personality questionnaires can be both tedious and expensive. However, with the use of internet, computer programs and various communication technologies, the process of taking the test as well as interpreting the results have significantly improved. One of the American restaurant operators who have described the old process of using personality test was , co-operator of a steak house located in Atlanta (, 2002).
The entrepreneur noted that managers before used to send in personality questionnaires through mail; the response of the applicants will arrive usually after a week. This is then the only time when the employer will make a decision to employ the applicant or not. In reality, applicants do not have a long time to wait for companies’ replies regarding their application. They would usually refer to look for jobs continuously until they are hired (, 2002). Thus, if potentially good applicants will apply for companies with faster and more efficient hiring procedures; other companies will lose valuable assets.
Nonetheless, the old procedure of giving out personality questionnaires is long gone. Nowadays, companies integrate computer programs and technologies to make the process faster and easier, both for the HR personnel and the applicants. This development then allowed organizations to avail a cost-effective tool for employee recruitment and selection. In the McKendrick’s Steak House for instance, the food establishment uses a program known as Check Start in order to screen their applicants through personality assessment.
The Check Start program can be loaded easily to the companies’ computers or websites. The applicants on the other hand can accomplish the test through the computers and accomplish them within 15 to 30 minutes. The program can then easily present the results in tables with analysis; questions related to the applicant’s results are also provided to guide the interviewer (, 2002). The integration of computer technology in administering personality questionnaire also supports the respondents claim that this tool is also easy to use.
It has been stated by the selected respondents that personality questionnaires are also advantageous as it helps bring the employees together and prevent conflicts. According to (2005), personality tests allow the concept known as on-boarding where new employees are given the opportunity to become comfortable with their new work environment and colleagues. Through personality assessments, managers are able to led both existing and new staff towards change. In actual application, the company can provide managers with the four dimensional personality assessments whenever new employees are hired; the results of their assessment can then be used to understand each personality type in order to help them adapt to change effectively. Through personality tests, the innate feature of each employee is obtained; this can be helpful in resolving and preventing conflicts. In particular, personality questionnaires help in depersonalizing conflicts among employees. The knowledge on individual differences through personality tests helps employees in understanding each other’s differences rather than on the conflict itself (, 2005). Through this, good relations among the employees will be developed and maintained.
The use of personality tests is also useful for HR managers particularly in helping out line managers who are to coach their subordinates. By means of personality assessments, coaches within the company are able to understand the needs and preferences of their subordinates; better coaching relationships are then developed through the use of personality questionnaires. If the subordinates need to be coached, the coaches or leaders should also be trained.
For this requirement, personality tests are also useful. In order for employees to be promoted and developed, companies must consider their potentials, skills and attitudes. The information on the employees’ personality will then help employers to determine their potential as future business leaders. Pitt Ohio Express, a trucking company in the United States, is focusing on the personality attributes of the key people that the company would need in the future. This then would help the company develop proper training programs for potential leaders among its existing employees. Moreover, this can also help in improving the company’s recruitment standards (, 2005).
Disadvantage
Although personality questionnaire is a reliable tool and has several advantages, it also has certain disadvantages, which have been pointed out by the respondents. One of which is the tendency of the applicants to fake their answers in the questionnaires in order to make themselves more appealing to the employers. According to software developer, , the main downside of personality questionnaires is that they are easily tampered or manipulated. He himself tried the MBTI test while interviewing some applicants for a food service company.
He noted that applicants usually have an idea on what the companies are looking for in an applicant for a certain position; with personality questionnaires patterning one’s answers based on the personality of an ideal employee is not very difficult to do. The software developer also noted that personality questionnaires are not exactly adaptable to all types of job specifications. For instance, it is understandable why personality tests are given for applicants applying for customer-oriented jobs. However, in the case of controller positions where skills are more essential, personality questionnaires become insignificant (, 2004).
In the study conducted by (2000), the researcher investigated whether individuals taking a personality questionnaire can really alter their scores in the testing. For this study, the researcher chose to use students as the sample participants. In this procedure, the actual test scores of the students were compared with their self-estimated scores. Descriptive statistics and explanations of every personality dimension assessed were provided. The results showed that students do have the tendency to overestimate their personality scores. Despite this finding, the researcher also concluded that the respondents were reasonably good in predicting their personality test scores.
The analysis also revealed that the tendency of the students to overestimate their test scores was because some items in the questionnaire were easy to predict. In particular, personality factors that relate to sociability and ambition were the ones that are easy to predict. In terms of school success and prudence, questions that relate to these factors were not as easy to foresee. The researcher noted that this finding is probably attributed to the fact that some personality factors are more commonly discussed among students as compared to others; for example, the ambition factor is more commonly discussed than prudence. The researcher also correlated the tendency of the students to overestimate the test scores with the ranges included in the questionnaire. The choices in the questionnaire restrict the students in making the right answers, thus, the tendency to overestimate the scores increases (, 2000).
In the research done by and (1990), the researchers believed that the issue of applicants distorting their scores in the personality test is not a grave concern as to what was initially believed; though, this issue is constantly debated and investigated. Furthermore, based from the findings of the research done by , it is clear that although there is a tendency for the applicants to intentionally or unintentionally give the wrong choices for their personalities, this issue is mostly correlated to the questionnaire’s quality and validity. If the personality questionnaire used by the company has not gone through initial tests for validity, it is likely that the applicants could easily fake their answers.
Although it was not indicated in the survey results of this study, one of the common disadvantages of personality questionnaire is its correlation with various legal issues. In particular, some companies or areas do not employ personality tests in their hiring or appraisal procedures due to its tendency to discriminate applicants. Specifically, other critics question the practice of screening applicants based on their religion, gender, origin, religion, age and other personal factors; critics claimed that with personality questionnaires, some employers have the authority to reject applications that do not meet their personality standards. Aside from discrimination issues, the personality questionnaire has also been criticized for its tendency to delve into private matters that do not seem to help the hiring or appraisal process (, 2004; , 1994). These disadvantages, while observed in some personality questionnaires can be addressed. In order to avoid these problems, the company using the personality test must ensure that the questionnaire has been validated. Moreover, the companies must ensure that the items in the questionnaire do not have any discriminatory effect towards the applicants, especially among minorities.
Chapter 7: Conclusion
This study is focused on the critical evaluation on the role and reliability of personality questionnaires in conducting various human resource activities including employee recruitment and appraisal. The research also aimed to identify the pros and cons of screening applicants through a personality test. Primary and secondary resources were used in the study. For the primary data, the researcher opted to conduct a survey using randomly selected HR personnel as participants. A questionnaire, structured in Likert format, was used for data gathering. The answers of the respondents were then processed by computing their corresponding weighted means. The results of the computation were then used as basis for the data analysis. Secondary resources derived from various publications including books and journals were integrated to support the findings.
Based from the results of the survey, personality questionnaires play an important role in the recruitment and appraisal of the employees. The respondents agree that this HR tool is capable of identifying essential personal attributes of the applicants, which promote effective hiring and promotion. In addition, personality tests have some other advantages. One of which is its ability to establish good relations among employees through the resolution or prevention of workplace conflicts. Personality tests also support the establishment of culture within the organization, which in turn helps in enhancing the performance of an output level in the company. The integration of computer technology in administering personality tests also made this tool a cost-effective means fro recruiting new employees. The use of personality tests also enables companies to save on valuable resources as it reduces the rate of employee turnover.
Despite these benefits, personality questionnaires also have certain drawbacks. For instance, the validity and accuracy of the results obtained from these questionnaires are continuously questioned. Considering that applicants can easily fake their personality scores, the results would naturally be affected. Moreover, while this tool is relatively inexpensive, it still requires highly skilled and trained HR staff to ensure correct analysis and interpretation results. Literatures however, noted that despite the training of the personnel, misinterpretation is still very likely; hence, it is difficult to employ a strategy whose outcome is not guaranteed. Other critics also pointed out that the use of personality questionnaire is inappropriate as it exhibits discrimination and violation of one’s privacy.
In general, personality questionnaire is not a full-proof tool for recruitment, appraisal and other HR procedures. While there may be flaws, literatures had noted that the downsides of personality tests can be addressed. For instance, its relation to legal and discrimination issues can be resolved by ensuring that the questionnaire has been validated. The company must also ensure that the questions in the test are all related to what the company really needs. Questions that infringe a person’s privacy or suggest discrimination should not be included (, 2004).
In the article written by (2002), HR professionals also suggested that companies should not fully rely on personality tests alone when hiring or appraising employees. For instance, personality tests should be combined with cognitive test to assess the intelligence of the applicants. Personality tests should not be used to substitute tools that measure the individual’s knowledge or capabilities. Hence, it is essential that HR professionals make use of various relevant predictors to improve hiring and promotion outcomes. In conclusion, all HR tools have its own pros and cons; HR staff should then be skilled enough to optimize their benefits and address their flaws.
References:
APPENDIX A: Questionnaire
This questionnaire is distributed in order to gather information regarding the role of personality questionnaire in human resource processes as well as its advantages and disadvantages. Through your participation, the study will be able to make possible recommendations that will highlight the functions of personality questionnaire and guidelines for its appropriate utilization. The following questions that you will read below pertain to your perception on the use of personality questionnaire in recruiting and appraising applicants or employees. Kindly encircle the number of your choice in answering this questionnaire. Please answer the questions as honestly as possible. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
Part I. Profile of the RespondentDirection: Kindly fill up the following with the correct details about yourself. Please don’t leave any item unanswered.
a. Age _______
b. Gender
Male ( ) Female ( )
c. Number of years in the company_________________________________
d. Current Position in the company_________________________________
Part II. Usability and Reliability of Personality Questionnaire
1. Based on existing workforce and human resource developments in your company, personality questionnaire has the ability to provide accurate results.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
2. Personality questionnaire is able to give objective findings that enable less personal recruitment decisions.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
3. The results of the personality questionnaire are easy to analyze and interpret.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
4. Personality questionnaire supports fast hiring procedures.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
5. Personality questionnaire contributes greatly to company performance and output.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
Part III. Pros and Cons of Personality Questionnaire
6. Personality questionnaire helps in determining whether the applicant is fit for the job or not.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
7. The use of personality questionnaire is advantageous as it can easily identify the individual’s potentials, behavior and work attitudes.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
8. Personality questionnaires demand several requirements such as trained staff and substantial experience for effective utilization.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
9. The use of a personality questionnaire can help in resolving or preventing personality-based conflicts in the workplace.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
10. Personality questionnaires can be administered and analyzed even by untrained staff, making test results less accurate.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
11. This human resource tool promotes team-building among employees.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
12. Personality questionnaire help employers in making effective promotion decisions.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
13. The possibility of misinterpretations despite the training is ever-present.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
14. The use of a personality questionnaire is useful as it is easy to administer.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
15. Personality questionnaire is unreliable as applicants may not give the score that truly represents their personality.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
16. Personality questionnaire is relatively cheap.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
17. This human resource instrument resolves issues on costs due to high turn over, misemployment and underperformance of employees.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
18. Applicants can easily fake their scores on personality questionnaires, affecting the results of the test.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
19. Questions in the personality questionnaire imply discriminations and can subject the company to legal issues.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
20. Personality questionnaire is a highly flexible tool as it can be customized according to the needs of the company.
4 3 2 1
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
0 comments:
Post a Comment