University of Southern Queensland
STUDY GUIDE
Module 9:
Testing,
Screening and
Deciding
MGT3005 Workforce Design
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 1
Module 9 – Testing, Screening, Deciding
( You have one week to cover the material in this module )
Introduction
Organisations should not be over-dependent on tests (Jones 2009), with a positive
relationship between the number of tests administered and the likelihood of a legal
challenge (Snell and Bohlander 2013). However, intelligence, aptitudes, knowledge
and skill, interest and temperament may be assessed as part of the selection process. It
is thought that tests can help improve the quality of selection decisions by providing
empirical evidence to complement an otherwise subjective selection process. Of course
this only occurs if the tests are valid and applicable to the job at hand.
In particular, psychological testing (personality and temperament testing) must be
designed by an expert in industrial psychology; for most HRM professionals this is
outside their expertise (which means you buy-in the expertise). Nevertheless, we will
consider the type of tests available, and the concept of validity in this module.
On the other hand, many organisations really must apply sound standards of due
diligence in relation to background checks and referee checks. Organisations should
expect to know the good and the not-so-good about a potential employee and referee
checking can provide insights into an applicant that can inform the selection decision.
Resume fraud is extensive, and background checks serve the purpose to verify facts:
such as whether the candidate actually possesses the qualifications that they claim to
have, or that the candidate has the right to obtain paid work in the country (an important
aspect in the face of globalisation).
We conclude this module by outlining a process the panel can use to arrive at a selection
decision and prepare feedback for the unsuccessful applicants.
Principal learning objectives for Module 9
The readings associated with this module aim to equip you with the knowledge to
address the following overarching module objectives:
Make the case for when it is appropriate to use tests as part of the selection
process.
Make the case for conducting effective background and referee checks.
Discuss a preferable process for arriving at, and recording, a selection decision.
Provide post-interview feedback.
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 2
Testing
‘The development of employment testing was a response to the 19th century struggles
against whimsical and unfair employment practices. According to their developers,
tests overall do what they purport to and do it better than any other device but only
when they are properly constructed, validated and evaluated’ (Jones 2009, p. 197)
Reading 1
Access the reading on the MGT3005 StudyDesk: ‘Pre-employment testing’ by Snell
and Bohlander (2013) (12 pp).
Using your preferred learning strategy (such as note-making, voice recording or
highlighting a printed copy) prepare brief summaries that will help you address the
following learning objectives associated with this reading:
1. Discuss the type of tests that can be used in selection.
2. Explain what is meant by the validity of a selection test and three important types
of validity.
3. Explain what is meant by cross-validation.
Testing and technology
The next reading ‘Could games give your recruitment an edge in a competitive
market?’ which is reproduced here in the study guide, provides insights about the use
of technology in selection processes. The article discusses the use of ‘gamification’
which involves the use of virtual reality and gaming to run simulation tests that are
believed to predict problem-solving, information processing speed, numerical
reasoning skills, verbal knowledge and other performance-related attributes. This
article provides an interesting example of the use of technology and progressive pre-
employment testing procedures that are potentially coming our way as human resource
professionals.
Using your preferred learning strategy (such as note-making, voice recording or
highlighting a printed copy) prepare brief summaries that will help you address the
following learning objectives associated with this reading:
4. Discuss why organisations in the future might move to investing in pre-selection
technology, such as gamification.
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 3
Could games give your recruitment an edge in a competitive market?
By Deb Peacock written on January 20, 2017
In the US, gaming has moved out of the basement and into the job interview.
Game-based recruitment is highly popular and now it’s gaining recognition here.
So how can computer games help you select the best candidate?
Last December, a games company located in a building tucked behind a Bunnings Warehouse
in the sleepy Brisbane suburb of Stafford competed alongside military simulation developers,
worldwide universities and professional game developers at the International Serious
Showcase & Challenge in Orlando, Florida.
While they weren’t the victors, as they were at the Australasian event, they succeeded in
attracting the largest crowds to their stand as people queued up to play Cognify, their latest
pre-hire assessment game.
So, what drew this international audience in? Most impressive was the game’s simplicity and
broad appeal as an effective and engaging way to reliably assess candidates for employment.
And the feedback was overwhelmingly positive.
“In the US, simulations and games are widely accepted as legitimate tools in the recruitment
process. There’s a lot of comfort with the concept of ‘serious games,'” says Revelian CEO,
Cherie Curtis.
Tell me more about game-based recruitment
Cognify is Revelian’s latest game-based psychometric assessment that uses game-based
design thinking, backed by psychometric science, to provide candidates and employers with
what they consider a vastly improved assessment experience.
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 4
One of the new wave of assessment tools, games like Cognify are gradually replacing more
traditional psychometric tests as a better way of objectively assessing critical skills and
attributes. And increasingly, they’re being adopted by leading employers in Australia and
internationally.
Are games really a good way to assess candidates?
And do they actually give you the information you need to make better hires? Here are 6
reasons why they could help your recruitment process.
1. Properlyconstructed games are based on psychometric science
and reputable models of human intelligence
While games are fun, most of them don’t have any bearing on how someone is going to
perform on the job.
Recruitment games assess proven indicators of future work performance, such as general
mental ability (GMA) and the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. Combined, they give
you a clear and objective indicator of each candidate’s problem-solving, information
processing speed, numerical reasoning skills, verbal knowledge and other performance-
related attributes.
2. They’re relevant for all roles
While some of the games in the marketplace today are clearly more suited to graduate and
entry-level recruitment, games such as Cognify represents a new breed of more sophisticated
and clean game design that appeals to a much broader audience.
Similar in appearance to some of the better ‘brain-training’ games, it also offers high face
validity: candidates can see how the skills measured are relevant to the job. Further, the
abilities assessed are important for every role, from entry-level admin to senior management.
3. They
enhance the candidate experience, which promotes your
employer brand
Increasingly, organisations are realising the importance of optimising a candidate’s journey
through their recruitment process. With 80 per cent of candidates recommending game-based
assessment, it’s clear that today’s digital natives prefer a more technically rich, immersive
recruitment experience.
“Candidates forget they’re completing an assessment, which means they’re less stressed, and
you get more authentic data about their performance, as well as promoting your brand as an
innovator,” explains Curtis.
4. They’re hard to ‘fake’
A common problem with traditional assessment methods – and indeed much of the
recruitment process – is the candidate’s (understandable) desire to present themselves in the
very best possible light. Games make it more difficult for candidates to distort their responses,
which gives employers a more robust and accurate appraisal of their suitability for a role.
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 5
As Jason Blaik, Head of Psychology at Revelian puts it, “Games like Cognify assess ability and
aptitude without exposing the nature of the construct being assessed. They offer a unique
candidate experience each time the game is played, while delivering an equal level of difficulty
to ensure a fair comparison”.
5. They provide a more complete assessment of each candidate
Another way games supersede traditional assessment methods is in the amount of data
collected for each candidate. While other assessments record a right or wrong answer, games
record and analyse every aspect of gameplay and potentially thousands of data points. This
means that you can get a better understanding of how each candidate approached different
problems and situations and arrived at their solutions, to give you more sophisticated insights
into each person.
6. They’re
applicable across all ages, genders, ethnicities and
backgrounds
Forget the stereotype of the 18-year-old male playing games in his parent’s basement: the
most recent stats show that the average game player is 33 and almost as likely to be female
as male. They’re also spread out across the world, with nearly 50% of players coming from the
Asia-Pacific region, followed by the US and Europe.
However, even if a person plays games every day, Revelian’s research shows that this doesn’t
impact their performance. As Jason Blaik tells us, “We analysed the data from game-players
and non-gamers very carefully. And, as we’d hoped, because our games offer each candidate
a unique experience, a person’s previous level of familiarity with computer games had little
impact on their performance.”
Internationally and in Australia, gamification is emerging as a tool for workplace activities
beyond the hiring room. Australian-based digital platform Wooboard allows employees to
receive a “Woo!” from their peers whenever they reach team or individual goals. And in the
US, companies such as Badgeville and CaptainUp are used for recruitment by the likes of Wells
Fargo, Dell and Hewlett Packard.
SOURCE: Australian Human Resource Management Institute,
[Link] accessed 2
February 2017
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 6
Background and referee checks
The purpose of background and referee checks ‘is to verify the accuracy of factual
information provided by the applicant and to uncover any missing information’
(Dessler & Tan 2009, p. 145). For instance, substance abuse screening and pre-
employment medicals would also fall within this domain.
If your firm has the financial resources, you can outsource most of these checks to
background checking agencies (such as [Link] or
[Link] ). Furthermore, the Government maintains a
number of registers where you can check credentials such a visa permission to work in
Australia [Link] VEVO
is a free online facility that allows organisations to check the visa entitlements of a visa
holder in Australia (only accessible to organisations within Australia). In relevant
circumstances, criminal history and security checks can be applied for via the Federal
Police [Link] .
As another example, ‘Blue Cards’ are required in Queensland for people who come
into contact with children through work, sport or recreational activities. The
government cards are issued once a ‘working with children check’ has been conducted
to see if the person is eligible to work in areas of child related work. The validity of a
‘blue card’ can be checked online [Link]
Remember though, you only run these types of checks if it is integral to the
selection criteria for the position on offer.
Reading 2
Access the reading on the MGT3005 StudyDesk: ‘Background investigations and
employment checks’ by Dessler (2013) (6 pp).
Using your preferred learning strategy (such as note-making, voice recording or
highlighting a printed copy) prepare brief summaries that will help you address the
following learning objectives associated with this reading:
5. Explain the reasons for conducting reference/background checks.
6. Provide guidelines on conducting effective reference and background checks
including reference to:
a. Legal issues (defamation and privacy).
b. Social networking checks.
c. Using agencies to conduct pre-employment background checks.
MGT3005 Workforce Design Study Guide Module 9 Page | 7
Deciding on the best candidate
In this reading, we focus on finalising the selection decision, preparing records to
reflect that decision, and advising unsuccessful applicants. (We look at making a job
offer to the successful candidate in the next module.)
Reading 3
Access the reading on the MGT3005 StudyDesk: ‘Deliberation and decision making
by Jones (2009) (9 pp).
Using your preferred learning strategy (such as note-making, voice recording or
highlighting a printed copy) prepare brief summaries that will help you address the
following learning objectives associated with this reading:
7. Outline the ‘consensual decision making’ process for determining the preferred
candidate.
8. List the type of information to include in a selection report and identify the
benefits of selection reports.
9. Discuss how one can provide constructive feedback to unsuccessful applicants.
References
Dessler, G. & Tan, C 2009, Human Resource Management: An Asian Perspective, 2nd edn,
Pearson Prentice-Hall, Singapore.
Jones, R 2009, HRM fundamentals, 2nd edn, Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest,
New South Wales
Peacock D 2017, Australian Human Resource Management Institute (AHRI),
[Link]
Snell, S & Bohlander, G 2013, Managing human resources, 16th edn, South-Western
Cengage Learning, Mason, Ohio, pp. 263-74.