I've had the recent unfortunate luck to come across the situational judgement test. Having never seen one before I wondered why it hadn't put a shot across my bows given I've had post graduate study in these things. Needless to say I failed the test a number of times, probably about 10 times and then hit it lucky with two passes. I do not understand how this test can relate to real life. Yes, it has been constructed by occupational psychologists, yes it went through the ringer with subject matter experts to check it's validity. However, from my first hand real life experience of the field it was testing me in, I am utterly and completely sure it is not an appropriate test to use. Given I have 20 years experience in a specific field and then found I failed the SJT has made me think how completely stupid and wrong it is. I understand every aspect of the prospective employer, they decided there would be certain traits their staff should have and they so fitted the test around those traits. They did not take any accounting of the applicants actual experience and actual abilities. The test was making a judgement on potential correct traits.
In fact finding I had failed and then re-trying the same test a number of times and failing again. Was ridiculous. I know if they had put me in a work setting I'd do the job to a pretty high standard, in fact I'm not your run of the mill average employee. I am currently in middle management and could do senior management roles. So I'm gutted. They have got it wrong. They have sold down the river an incredibly capable person, they did it all online and without even a single sentence between me and a recruiter.
These SJT are tailor made, they are tested on staff who are already doing the job, however, those staff had to gain experience and knowledge in the actual job before they became experts. They had to learn through real life experience and they no doubt changed as they learnt the job. The reply or answer they gave when the test was being constructed may be completely different from the answer they acquired over time and through learning. This learning process is important. The SJT then justifies itself by saying that the experts map well onto the actual questions and answers they've constructed. However, the reality of the test is it must be mapped to those who have already been employed through the test scenarios at 6 months to a year later. Further, they should employ staff who failed the tests provided and then compare them also in 6 months to a year later. There has to be not just a control but a counter control. I'd bet given the chance the training and the experience, even those who were not considered suitable for the job would be able to do the job and some would be excellent at it. Effectively I would argue the sifting process is at fault, especially if it does not take into account someone's life experiences and past experience.
It's OK to say the test examines attributes such as Dignity, Compassion, Respect and maths ability. However, if an employee is put in a overwhelming work situation, will these aspects also control whether the candidate can keep a calm head under pressure? I doubt it very much.
So for now I have to keep my above average wage job and can not move onto a lower wage job in the same sphere because I failed the test. They don't know what they have rejected.
No comments:
Post a Comment