15 Minute Method to Discover Which Applicants Are Worth Testing

Companies using my pre-employment tests often ask how to decide which applicants should take the tests. I generally respond:

1. Do not give pre-employment tests to every applicant.
2. Most companies test the top 3 - 5 applicants for each job opening.

This article tells you about a quick, 15-minute method you can use to figure out which applicants you should have fill-out pre-employment tests.

RESEARCH THAT HELPS YOU HIRE THE BEST

Research shows pre-employment tests are the most accurate way to predict how a job applicant may perform on-the-job. In contrast, most interviewers make incorrect and subjective judgments about job applicants. And reference checks often prove unreliable and fail to help much.

Reasons pre-employment tests prove highly useful are tests are research-based, objective, and can be custom-tailored for each job in your company. In sharp contrast, interviews are not created from research, horribly subjective and, thus, interviewers usually inaccurate predictions.

With this pre-employment tests able to help you, you benefit from including tests as a prediction method if you crave to hire the best.

PROBLEM: HIRING MANAGERS OFTEN CREATE WASTEFUL MESS

Managers all-too-often waste immense time and energy on applicants they should not even consider.

If pre-employment tests are not given early in the selection process, managers often make this time-wasting, energy-draining, stupid mistake:
1. 30 - 60 minutes - reviewing and thinking about applicant's resume or application
2. 30 - 60 minutes - discussing applicant with other managers
3. 1 - 2 hours - interviewing applicant
3. 1 hour - thinking about interview
4. 1 - 2 hours - talking about interview with other managers

Total time used or wasted on one applicant = 4 - 7 hours

After investing 4 - 7 hours of expensive management time on one applicant, then the manager might decide to give pre-employment tests to the applicant.

If pre-employment test scores indicate it is a great applicant, then the manager is happy.

But if pre-employment test scores indicate the applicant should not be hired, then the manager suddenly realizes s/he wasted 4 - 7 hours of time on an applicant who was not worth it.

At that point, some managers feel foolish they did not test the applicant earlier, rather than wasting 4 - 7 hours considering a loser.

But other managers get emotionally committed to hiring anyone they spend 4 - 7 hours on, despite lousy pre-employment test scores. They fret, "I spent 4 - 7 hours on that applicant. Plus, I don't want to find more applicants and then spend 4 - 7 hours on them. So, I think I'll 'shoot the messenger' - that is, ignore test scores clearly indicating this applicant should not be hired."