Joni just called in sick again, for the third Monday in four weeks. Although Joni took a drug test before she was hired, her supervisor suspects she is out partying all weekend and finds it hard to get up for work on Monday mornings. Now she’s going to have to go without a secretary for another day. Bill’s team is late getting the results of the customer survey in, so the company can’t meet its publishing deadline. Talk to Bill’s teammates, and they’ll tell you that he is conscientious to a fault. Unfortunately, that also means that he has to check and recheck the results of the survey several times, to make sure they’re right. In fact he is in his office right now, rechecking for a third time, as the publishing deadline comes and goes. Lisa’s job interview went great. She had terrific references. Everyone loved her and thought she’d make a great manager. Her wit, her charm…she had personality that wouldn’t quit. Unfortunately, her staff sees it differently, and three of them have quit in as many months. Lisa will do anything to get the job done, including browbeating her team, mocking her superiors behind their backs, and having temper tantrums in the face of minor setbacks. Marty doesn’t understand what he did wrong. He thought that his customer, Emily, had enjoyed flirting with him. So when she said she had a headache, he offered to give her a neck massage. When she refused he started to caress her shoulder. When she politely pulled away, he told her she was beautiful, and suggested they finish writing up the sale “someplace more private.” Marty was stunned when the vice president himself asked, “What in the world were you thinking?”

Why do some people with solid resumes, good references, and good interviewing skills become “hires from Hell,” and what can be done to prevent this from happening to you?

It’s likely that your company already uses an extensive hiring process that may include multiple interviews, reference checks, and off-the-shelf tests of job skills or integrity. Maybe you also get a background criminal check. What more can you do?

Preemployment psychological assessment (sometimes referred to as “psychological screening”) can add significantly to this process in a number of ways. Psychologists have extensive training in understanding and measuring behavior, including intelligence, ability and aptitudes, personality characteristics, and group dynamics. By measuring and analyzing these domains through a battery of tests and interviews, psychologists can tell you a lot about a potential employee, and make predictions about future performance.

What Types of Psychological Characteristics are Most Important?

Intelligence and problem-solving skill. People who are likable and interview well are often described as being more intelligent than they really are. Tests of verbal skills, inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, and practical problem solving lend objectivity to the assessment of intelligence. Some tests measure cognitive flexibility and efficiency, the ability to keep many balls in the air at once. Bill probably scores low in cognitive flexibility.

Judgment. Practical and social judgment are critical to most jobs that involve working in a team setting or with customers. Marty’s social judgment is so poor that his company may be on the wrong end of a sexual harassment lawsuit. Very young employees may be naïve in their judgment, which may get better over time. Otherwise, judgment, even in people who are otherwise intelligent, is very hard to train. Psychological tests and task simulations can help identify judgment problems.

Honesty and integrity. These are obvious concerns in any organization. They may have to do with theft of merchandise or money, stealing trade secrets or customer lists, or, as in Joni’s case, undermine staff productivity or morale through deceitful behavior that leads to a low level of trust. This is one of the most difficult areas to accurately assess. Conscientiousness and responsibility are also related to integrity, and describe the employee’s work ethic and commitment to getting the job done. Unless directly uncovered in a background check of criminal offenses or other unethical actions, such behavior must be indirectly evaluated through tests and interview methods. Personality assessment can accurately identify a number of personality types that are at risk for deceptive or irresponsible behavior.

Attitudes toward supervision. The ability to accept constructive criticism is essential in any line of work. Employees need to be able to accept feedback, as well as supervisory demands, such as deadlines, in a matter-of-fact manner, and without undue underlying resentment. Otherwise passive-aggressive behavior, such as absenteeism, tardiness, or resisting or bending of rules may occur. Personality tests can give very good information about an employee’s agreeableness and willingness to accept direction.

Leadership. Managers need to be skilled in how to give feedback and make demands of their supervisees. Those who are thin-skinned, authoritarian, or insensitive to others’ needs, like Lisa, tend to have trouble keeping their teams cohesive and running smoothly. However, leaders who are unduly conflict avoidant have trouble getting things done because they don’t want to make anyone angry with them. Leaders need to be guided by the big picture, and not get bogged down in details. However, they must balance this attitude with an ability to set realistic goals and avoid “pie in the sky” missions. Psychological tests and interview formats can be very helpful in assessing leadership skill.

Absence of bias. In today’s increasingly diverse work force, underlying biased attitudes can lead to friction between coworkers. Biases towards people of different races or genders can lead to poor staff morale, or in severe cases, discrimination or harassment charges. Interestingly, most people who may show bias on tests do not see themselves as biased, prejudiced, or bigoted. Marty may well show negative attitudes towards women on psychological assessment measures.

Team orientation. Good interpersonal skills, social judgment, empathy, and an orientation towards group over individual achievement define people who work well in teams. People who are socially aloof or highly uncomfortable around others, or those who show poor anger management skills, may also have problems in a team environment. Are Joni and Lisa team players? How do you think they would score on tests measuring these processes?

Absence of alcohol and drug abuse. While many organizations have instituted drug and alcohol testing to help identify individuals with substance abuse problems, their validity is limited to detecting substances consumed within very recent time periods. In addition, problematic alcohol consumption is rarely identified. However, through the testing and interview process a psychologist can often uncover an ongoing pattern of substance abuse that would make an employee unsuitable for the position applied for. Joni would probably have been screened out in this process.

Stress tolerance. Almost all jobs are stressful, some more than others. Sometimes an employee can function adequately on one job, but show performance problems due to poor stress tolerance on another. Such a reaction can result in unacceptable absenteeism, withdrawal from team members, irritability, or anger outbursts. The ability to tolerate stressful situations can be understood and described by an experienced psychologist.

What are the Best Methods to Use?

A battery of tests that measure different aspects of the characteristics described above is likely to produce more reliable and valid results than a single test can. An in-depth personal interview that evaluates the applicant’s interpersonal skill and judgment, stress tolerance, and personal history is also an important component of the assessment methodology. Moreover, aspects of the applicant’s test results that raise red flags can be thoroughly and aggressively pursued during the interview.

In our practice, we routinely begin the assessment process by obtaining a job description and subsequently meeting with administrators. We want to know about employees who have done well and those who have not done well in this position in the past. We want to identify which cognitive and personality characteristics the administrators or incumbents believe are important. We then come up with a working list of characteristics that we can agree are important for the position in question. Once we thoroughly understand the primary concerns to be addressed during the assessment, we select our test battery and interview questions. We routinely use a test battery of 5-10 tests, and an interview that lasts 30-120 minutes, depending on the type of job being screened for.

Once the examination is complete, we will issue a written recommendation as to whether or not to hire an individual, and provide information that will be useful in supervision or training of the applicant in the event that he or she is actually hired. After the final hiring decision has been made, we are also available to give applicants feedback on their assessment performance if either the applicant or the employer requests it. Such feedback can be an important coaching tool for hired applicants.

The cost for a preemployment assessment can vary widely depending on the type of job, the employer’s concerns, and the psychologist’s fee schedule. Spending a lot of money is no guarantee of an accurate or useful assessment. However, an experienced and value-minded psychologist can usually construct an assessment process that fits into most budgets. More importantly, in the long run, the cost of consistently performing high quality preemployment assessments will significantly outweigh the costs of a few, or even one, bad hire.

In conclusion, psychological preemployment screening can be a valuable tool to increase the probability that an organization is hiring the right person for the job, and to avoid the expense, headaches, and liability that can be generated by hiring people like Joni, Bill, Lisa, or Marty