Testing the testers

Online psychometric testing has had its critics, but in theory the Internet is the perfect delivery mechanism for candidate assessment. Our Type Perfect guinea pig reports on the user experience at three sites. By Sue Weekes.

So, would the tests confirm what I believed? That I am a team-playing, high-energy individual who shies away from leadership but is happy to take responsibility for my own patch. While we're interested to see if the results match up to the self-perception, this experiment is more about assessing the user experience when it comes to psychometric testing for HR professionals who may be considering its use.

I chose three companies: SHL, The Test Agency and ERAS. From ERAS I sampled its free trial personality profiler test. For the other two, I was given a password and user ID to access each site because ordinarily the recruiter would be the client and not the candidate. With both SHL and the Test Agency, I would be sitting the test having already built up some kind of relationship with my potential new employer. It's also important to bear in mind that when it comes to results, the client would receive more feedback and supporting material than the candidate profile that I received.

Test one : SHL

Whose test?
SHLSolutions.com is the online arm of SHL Group, which has provided psychometric testing to the HR world for over 30 years. The test is one of the tools within SHLSolutions.com's recruitment, selection and development service.

Methodology
The test comprises 230 statements, which SHL estimates takes 35-40 minutes to complete, but there is no time limit. It took me around 25 minutes to do the test. For each statement, I was asked to strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree. There was also an 'unsure' option, although the test discouraged me from selecting this wherever possible. I was asked to think of work or similar situations when answering rather than domestic or social situations.

User experience
Easy to use and although 230 statements seemed daunting, I actually got through them much quicker than I had anticipated. This was partly because I found that the longer I dwelled on each one, the more likely I was to opt for unsure, the option it discourages. It's fair to say though, that I certainly felt more stimulated at the beginning of the test than towards the end.

Results
Overall, extremely accurate. The report says that the description of behaviour is likely to be valid for around 18-24 months, depending on work role and personal circumstances. It is broken down into three main categories: relationships with people, which covers influence, sociability and empathy; thinking style, covering analysis, creativity and change and structure; and feelings and emotions, covering emotion and energy and drive. There wasn't too much that I disagreed with in the results and the questions had managed to extract the dichotomy that while I like to invest energy consulting and listening to others and have a strong interest in colleagues, I also have a tendency to talk about myself and my successes - not the most attractive trait in the world. The analysis was sufficiently detailed to make me feel like I'd learned something about myself (it reminded me of my enjoyment at discussing hypothesis at work, which I'd lost sight of over the years) and it's certainly valid for HR professionals. No areas for improvement were given in the report but bear in mind the potential recruiter receives far more information than I received.

Overall perception
Easy to use and readable results.

User experience: 8/10

Test two: ERAS

Whose test?
ERAS Ltd, a management consultancy serving HR for 20 years. The Quest Personality Profiler test I sat is currently available on its site for free.

Methodology
The test comprises 220 statements which ERAS claims takes around 20 minutes to complete and this proved fairly accurate in my case. Statements are broken down into groups of five and I was asked to say which statements in the block described me best and which describes me least well. The site says not to spend too long on each one and to consider them in a work context. Before starting the test it gathers some personal data such as age, gender, industry sector and position.

User experience
There were a few occasions when I found it difficult to come down on the side of best and least well, and hankered after a middle ground option. The need to be black and white in my responses meant that I dwelled longer on some of the statements and so gave a less instinctive and intuitive response.

Results
Responses were calculated within a few seconds, which is what today's generation of Internet users would expect. I was first given a set of ratings out of 10 for a number of attributes, which were broken into four groupings: people (including assertiveness, influence, social ease, outgoingness, team-working); thinking (including curiosity, creativity, strategy and analysis); feeling (including freedom from stress, sensitivity, optimism and buoyancy); and drive (including reliability, need for challenge and risk aversion). If I scored five or six, then it meant I was in line with most people. I rated six in the majority of categories and higher in the areas of team-working and supportiveness, which was what I'd expect. Following this I received my profile chart, which in the main proved that five or six was normal and any higher and lower than this was a more marked response. Descriptions are concise, although an IT glitch struck on some of mine which led to me, the out-and-out team player, to be told 'that I don't work productively alongside others'. However, after discussing this matter with ERAS, the company confirmed that it was a glitch that has since been rectified - but it does go to prove that in an online world, things can go awry. Having read descriptions of ratings, I then clicked to view competencies, which sets out a number of strengths and development needs. I found I had a bounty of strengths - 19 - most of which I agreed with, and while this was good for my ego, my lack of development needs (just one: information gathering), left me feeling that I'd been short-changed when it came to areas I should work on.

Overall perception
Easy to use and thorough package of responses that are delivered within seconds - and it's currently free to use. Certainly a worthwhile 30 minutes.

User experience: 7/10

Test three: The Test Agency

Whose test?
The Test Agency claims it was the first UK test publisher to offer a full online service and this has been delivered through its partnership with US-based Pan Testing. Its first online tests appeared four years ago and the full Pan-based system has been available for more than two years.

Methodology
The test comprises 100 adjectives and phrases commonly used to describe different aspects of behaviour. The site asked me to indicate to which extent each one describes my typical behaviour at work and I was given the following options: very accurately; quite well; moderately; a little; and not at all. It took around 20 minutes to complete the test and there is no time limit on it.

User experience
The inclusion of a middle-ground option (moderately) as in the ERAS test helped move swiftly through the questions instinctively rather than dwelling too long. Because there were only 100, divided into five pages, responses remained fresh throughout. Clients are able to view the testing process from the inside while the candidate is performing the test.

Results:
Extremely detailed and I liked the way it put my score (or sten) in context with the population. That said, having known that my score for agreeableness (10) is achieved by 2 per cent of people, I hankered after knowing how the rest of the population was sliced up when it came to this attribute. Again, results were much in keeping with self-perception and it picked up on my desire to sometimes work as a team but also that I will equally choose to work independently. On the emotional resilience rating, it suggested an impatience with colleagues that I would refute but maybe that is the test doing a better job of knowing me than I do myself. Interestingly, I probably emerged as being more creative in this test than the others taken and was myself surprised to read that I show some willingness to question traditional rules and assumptions. This was certainly at odds with the SHL findings that, with hand on heart, I feel are a truer reflection of me on this matter. Each main section of the report concludes with a list of work environments that I am likely to work best in which offers good bite-sized information and throughout the report there is plenty of indication of areas that could be improved upon.

Overall perception
Liked the fact that there were less statements to get through and good, detailed results and feedback.

User experience: 7/10