An interview is a personality test. Basically, they are trying to reinvent the wheel.
Many many personality tests are pure junk. Of if they have any value at all that value is rarely gleaned from some HR person reviewing and interpreting the results. They might as well as you what astronomical sign you are.
Back in the 1970 and early 80's did personally tests, IQ tests, interviews, etc.
Look, if you don't like the way they do it, stop looking to work for someone else, put your back into it and start your own business.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Nearly 20 years ago I went for a job interview. Part of the interview was with a psychologist. Amazingly enough I got the job.
I dont go to work to make friends and if I do, thats a bonus.
As far as "personality tests" go , the vast majority of them are used to weed out people with high IQ's (defined as anything above 104 which is average, 100, plus the standard deviation of the test) and any initiative ,, they're looking for reliable sheep who follow orders and don't think too much ,, if you're having trouble getting hired you're probably looking at the wrong companies...
Go on welfare....
By far, the most accurate means of telling if an applicant will be successful is to know his IQ. Since that's been forbidden, employers need roundabout methods of telling who's going to be worth hiring.
I took a personality test for a position and found it possibly more instructive for me than for the company. The result, I was made a nice offer, but from the test I realized that was not the kind of work I wanted and I turned it down.
In the box labeled personality, just check "yes" and move on to the next question.
An "ethical" employer will not use negative personality traits against an applicant?
What employer WOULD NOT use negative personality traits against a job seeker? Sheesh! What am I missing here?
Sorry, off point there...anyways, one of the reasons for these tests is, of course, to justify the existence of the HR department. The other reason, which people never realize, is that the employer is "setting the tone" with the interview process. Indeed, one of the purposes of the interview process is to let the applicant know what the company is about. In that regard, you should pay attention to what a potential employer is trying to tell you.
The ugly truth is that lawyers, the PC Police, the ACLU, etc have made it damn near impossible to fire someone these days. If you do wish to terminate someone, the process is lengthy and often painstaking, mainly due to fears of retallitory litigation, unemployment hearings, and mountains of paperwork.
Thus, we're a lot more selective in who we hire. Managers need to be absolutely certain that the person they're hiring is the best "long term" fit for the position. Long gone are the days when you could hire and fire at will, for any reason, and not face legal repurcussions.
We use a couple of different assessments in our hiring processes, depending on the level of the position. By and large, the assessments serve us well. They're written in such a way that you can tell if the person answering is simply telling you what you want to hear, or if they're truly being candid. It will ask the same question in a few different ways to glean a truthful response. We face it every day, some people can interview very well and tell you exactly what you want to hear (if I have one more person say they're a "motivated self-starter" I'll scream), but turn out to be complete disasters once they've been hired.
These assessments serve as an effective way to ferret through the BS. They also give you ammunition to justify your decisions should someone claim you discriminated against them during the hiring process.
Heck, I had to take a lie detector test for a job 30 years ago. I don't trust lie detector tests after that. It indicated I lied on a question (theft related) I told the truth on and indicated I told the truth on a question I lied big time on (drug question).
Personally, I have no objections to taking a personality test, but I will not take a lie detector test. First, I've never known a lie detector administrator that has as clean a criminal history as I do, and second, everyone, and I mean everyone, has done things they'd just as soon no one else know about. I've turned down four jobs because they either demanded a lie detector test or demanded I sign a form agreeing to take one if they told me to.
It is the new diversity tool. I work in a group that has more highly driven people than the other personalities combined. If you want to see some fun, put two strong personalities on the opposite side of a topic.
Think so?