Testing the water; using work sampling for selection

Psychometric testing continues to be a contentious issue among recruiters, despite many organisations having adopted testing as an integral part of staff selection. Work sample tests are now recognised as one of the most effective predictors of future job performance, according to a report released today (Wednesday 30 June) by IRS Employment Review, published by LexisNexis

Work sample tests replicate the work tools and environment associated with the vacancy, to assess the level of the candidateís existing skills and knowledge as accurately as possible. This involves looking at a sample of the functional skills and often relevant behaviours that can be used to predict future performance in a similar work situation. A work sample test is the closest to replicating the day-to-day work of a particular vacancy, where the use of assessment centers cannot be justified.

Several employers were interviewed about their approach to using work sampling; these include: Marks & Spencer plc and the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service).


Other points include:

Employers must be aware of equal opportunities legislation when conducting any kind of psychometric test, taking particular care to avoid indirect discrimination or disability discrimination.

A new statutory provision has resulted in a slightly different definition of indirect discrimination in the case of sex and race, which can now occur where an occupational test unfairly and unjustifiably disadvantages one sex or race over another.

Recruiting organisations can buy off-the shelf testing products for selection to some generic roles, such as clerical, administrative, mechanical and managerial, but can also design their own work sample tests or commission bespoke exercises from an external supplier.

There are other drawbacks associated with work sample tests that can limit their use in certain situations. Depending on the particular circumstances, work sample tests can be resource intensive, partly because it may be feasible to assess just one candidate at a time. Expensive materials or machinery may also be needed to administer the tests properly. It is not practicable to test candidates on a task or duty that in real life would typically take days or weeks to complete. Work sample tests are therefore more suitable for predicting performance in tasks that can be completed within a short space of time.

It is the applicantís ability to carry out a task in the test environment that is being measured. Tests cannot assess other factors; for example, will the candidate have the motivation and personal attributes to perform well once employed? Ability and aptitude tests are most effective when they represent one strand of the whole selection process.


IRS Employment Review Retention and Recruitment editor, Neil Rankin said:

ìThere is mounting evidence that using more sophisticated measurement techniques can greatly enhance the selection processís ability to find the best candidate, and do so without unfair discrimination. As work sample tests replicate the actual tasks performed on the job, they carry a high predictive quality if administered in a standardised setting.

ìThe relatively high costs often associated with developing and conducting these tests can therefore be justified in appropriate circumstances by their contribution to a sound appointment decision. That does not mean that an organisation should rely on the results of these ability tests alone; their validity is only as high as the overall effectiveness of the selection process, and their results should never be used in isolation. Psychometric testing overall is likely to continue to be a popular but remain equally controversial part of the recruitment process for the foreseeable future. Work sample testing can, at least, demonstrate their validity in helping to find the best candidate for the job.î