What is it?
There are many definitions of personality. If we take the Wikipedia
definition that:
- ‘In psychology, personality describes the character of emotion,
thought, and behaviour patterns unique to a person. There are several
theoretical perspectives on personality in psychology, which involve
different ideas about the relationship between personality and other
psychological constructs, as well as different theories about the way
personality develops.’
we can immediately see that the word ‘personality’ is probably
construed in a variety of ways depending on the definitions held by an
individual.
In general ‘lay terms’, personality can be said to define the entirety
of an individual’s behaviour and would include emotional maturity,
intelligence, values, attitudes, beliefs and temperament (as well as many
other complex issues which make up the whole person). Commercial tests or
assessments however, usually measure much narrower, more finite areas.
The McQuaig Word Survey®
measures temperament.
Temperament
Temperament can be described as the way we go about the execution of a
task, project, or in fact our whole life, if we are left to our own
devices. It fashions the way we apply our values, attitudes and beliefs,
but does not alter them significantly.
Using personality profiling in selection or
assessment of current staff
Whilst modern commercially available personality profiling generally
has strong validity, it should be treated primarily as an indicator of
behaviour. In our view it should not be used in isolation to decide a
‘pass’ or ‘fail’ for any given job. Rather the results of the assessment
should be used in conjunction with other data gathered from reference
checks, CVs and behavioural interviewing to form a fuller picture of the
individual before a valid decision can be made. In this context, the
personality measure should give focus to the interview, generating areas
to research where competency gaps may exist.
History of personality profiling
Over time, personality profiling has developed from basic models first
developed in ancient Greek times using a simple ‘pigeon-holing’ technique
designed to fit people into a very limited group of ‘types’. Early
examples of this method can be traced back to ancient philosophers like
Hippocrates, Heraclitus & Galen.
More recently, in the early decades of the last century, Carl Jung
further researched these methods and formulated his theory of Jungian
typology, which is arguably the grandfather of many of today’s commercial
systems.
Personality profiling in the 21st century has come a long way since
Jung’s original work and many highly valid systems for assessing
personality are available, both in the commercial and academic arenas.
There are two main ways in which personality can be reported:
- Observed behaviour, where a trained psychologist will
interview and assess an individual, and maybe even set group or
individual tasks.
- Self-reported behaviour, where the individual completes a
questionnaire which presents a series of questions about their preferred
behaviour. This is the most frequent category of assessment used in the
commercial world and may comprise a variety of techniques. These
techniques range from asking the candidate to simply tick boxes next to
a series of listed behaviours to indicate that they describe them,
through questions with true or false answers; ranking behaviours as
‘most like me’ or ‘least like me’ up to a full forced choice ranking of
a list of available behaviours. The latter asks the candidate to rank a
series of differing behaviours in the order that they best apply to
them. The McQuaig Word
Survey® uses a forced choice, four adjective technique to
assess the preferred behaviours of the candidate.
Is personality profiling a valid predictor of
performance in the workplace?
There has been much discussion about the validity of personality
profiling as a predictor of performance in the workplace. The vast
majority of commentators now accept that the use of personality profiling
and other similar measures in pre-employment screening significantly
improves the predictivity of the selection process. It is also accepted
that these tools can also be used as the basis of career-pathing and
development programs.
Hogan, Hogan and Roberts, after an exhaustive review, conclude that:
- well constructed measures of normal personality are valid predictors
of performance in virtually all occupations,
- they do not result in adverse impact for job applicants or minority
groups; and
- using well developed personality measures for pre-employment
screening is a way to promote social justice and increase organisational
productivity.
R. Hogan, J. Hogan and BW Roberts, ‘Personality measurement and
employment decisions’, American Psychologist, vol. 51, no. 5, 1996,
p. 469.
This could be further clarified by a statement from R.E. Hicks, a
senior lecturer in management and psychology at Queensland University of
Technology, who in an article published in Asia Pacific Human Resources
Manager, vol. 29 no.1 of Autumn 1991, said:
- ‘I believe the more successful organisations in the future in
Australia are likely to be those who among other approaches make
considered and effective use of psychological tests, questionnaires and
procedures in staff selection, allocation and development.’
Hicks introduces a further element here; that of skills and abilities
testing through questionnaires and other procedures. It is important to
note, as quoted by Hicks, that these systems should be used in a
‘considered and effective’ manner and that they should be compounded into
a procedure which is both objective and repeatable.
|
