Both tests are 24 minutes against the clock and designed
with a count-down timer to create a degree of pressure and stress to see how
you respond.
Let’s examine a couple of really scenarios
Scenario 1 - There are 40 questions and Sam answers 20 of
them, all correctly, in the time available. Score: Of the ones Sam answered Sam
got them 100% right, but Sam only answers half the questions so Sam scores 50% Interpretation:
Sam is slow, but correct.
Scenario 2- There are 40 questions and Alex answers 40 of
them, getting only half of them right, in the time available. Score: Alex also
scores 50%, but using a very different approach. Interpretation: Alex is fast,
but not correct.
The scores are the same, but have very different interpretation
which may be gathers be assessing the time spend on reading and responding to
each question. Presupposing accurate timing of each was recorded.
Let’s examine different context and strategies with
different implications
Strategy A – The aim is to get the most right, so if you are
running out of time you are better guessing (and having a 20% chance of getting
it right) rather than let the clock run-out and not score.
Strategy B – The aim is to get the least wrong, so if you
are running out of time you are better spending time getting it right than
being panicked or guessing wrong.
Real life implications
If you were in a business/culture/context where speed and getting
most right made money or saved lives then you may consider Strategy A. Perhaps
in this context Alex may be the better candidate.
If you were in a business/culture/context where accuracy getting
is wrong cost lives or money then you may consider Strategy B. Perhaps in this
context Sam may be the better candidate.
This was not an unusual psychometric test, but the
implications of how the algorithms are interpreted and the context in which
they are delivered produce very, very different outcomes.
What is interesting in this context is the GDPR Implications.
Under General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR] Sam or Alex
are entitled to know how the process works. The have rights related to
automated decision making including profiling. This type of test is
specifically mentioned: “a recruitment aptitude test which uses pre-programmed
algorithms and criteria.”
See
Because this type of processing is considered to be
high-risk the GDPR requires you to carry out a Data Protection Impact
Assessment (DPIA) to show that you have identified and assessed what those
risks are and how you will address them.
GDPR also:
1. requires
you to give individuals specific information about the processing;
2. obliges
you to take steps to prevent errors, bias and discrimination; and
3. gives
individuals rights to challenge and request a review of the decision.
These provisions are designed to increase individuals’
understanding of how you might be using their personal data.
You must:
·
provide meaningful information about the logic
involved in the decision-making process, as well as the significance and the
envisaged consequences for the individual;
·
use appropriate mathematical or statistical
procedures;
·
ensure that individuals can:
a)
obtain human intervention;
b)
express their point of view; and
c)
obtain an explanation of the decision and
challenge it;
·
put appropriate technical and organisational
measures in place, so that you can correct inaccuracies and minimise the risk
of errors;
·
secure personal data in a way that is
proportionate to the risk to the interests and rights of the individual, and
that prevents discriminatory effects.
If you are an HR professional or expert in psychometric testing
I would be very interested in your feedback, experience and suggestions.
No comments:
Post a Comment