26.10.2014 Views

TOP - September 2005 - APS Member Groups - Australian ...

TOP - September 2005 - APS Member Groups - Australian ...

TOP - September 2005 - APS Member Groups - Australian ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 2. Factors Typically<br />

Measured by Integrity Tests<br />

Do integrity tests really work?<br />

The bottom line is whether integrity tests<br />

can effectively predict theft and other<br />

counterproductive work behaviours. The<br />

answer is a resounding ʻyesʼ. Integrity<br />

tests have been under the scrutiny of<br />

academic research for the past two decades,<br />

resulting in hundreds of published<br />

articles and conclusive results. Ones and<br />

Viswesvaran (1998) assert that integrity<br />

tests are perhaps the most researched<br />

scales in the occupational literature. The<br />

wealth of data points to the effectiveness<br />

of such testing.<br />

Four large-scale, meta-analytic studies<br />

(OʼBannon, Goldinger, & Appelby, 1989;<br />

Ones, Viswesvaran, & Schmidt 1993;<br />

Ones, Viswesvaran, & Schmidt, 2003;<br />

Sackett et al., 1989) reviewed hundreds<br />

of pieces of published empirical research<br />

and concluded that integrity tests have<br />

substantial generalisable validities. Figure-<br />

3 summarises the behaviours found to be<br />

strongly predicted by these tests.<br />

Figure 3. Factors Predicted by<br />

Integrity Tests<br />

While the main aim of integrity tests is to<br />

predict counterproductive work behaviours,<br />

research has found them also to be<br />

excellent predictors of job performance,<br />

more so than any other form of broad personality<br />

assessment (Ones & Viswesvaran,<br />

1998). In Australia, it is a common practice<br />

for recruitment companies to use tests<br />

measuring broad personality dimensions<br />

(e.g., 16PF, NEO PI) hoping that these<br />

will predict an individualʼs future job performance.<br />

But whilst personality measures<br />

undoubtedly assist the recruiter in understanding<br />

the broader characteristics of the<br />

job incumbent, research has not substantiated<br />

a strong relationship between<br />

broad personality dimensions and job<br />

performance (see Organ & Ryan, 1995 and<br />

Borman et al., 2001 for major reviews).<br />

However, Ones and Viswesvaran (2001),<br />

after comparing the predictive validities<br />

of some of the commonly used personality<br />

measures with the predictive validities of<br />

integrity tests found integrity tests to be<br />

superior in predicting job performance.<br />

Integrity Tests - Applications<br />

The use of integrity tests is not limited to<br />

specific business sectors or occupations;<br />

ʻintegrityʼ is almost a prerequisite for any<br />

new employee. Having said that, there are<br />

a number of industries that treat the integrity<br />

test as an integral part of their screening<br />

procedure for all new employees.<br />

Integrity tests are most commonly used<br />

when recruiting for entry-level positions<br />

that involve the direct handling of and<br />

responsibility for money and merchandise.<br />

Financial institutions, retail chains, supermarkets,<br />

hospitality and fast-food chains<br />

are good examples (and big consumers) of<br />

the sorts of organisations who extensively<br />

use integrity assessments.<br />

However, the main niche for the use of<br />

integrity tests is in the recruitment of<br />

employees to ʻsensitiveʼ positions where<br />

such testing is combined with industrial<br />

security background checks. These<br />

include, for example, the testing of casino<br />

personnel, bank employees and security<br />

personnel.<br />

A ʻbest practiceʼ recruitment strategy for<br />

more senior positions (e.g., professionals<br />

and middle to senior management) is<br />

to obtain a broad perspective on the job<br />

incumbent. Therefore, the inclusion of<br />

integrity tests within a larger assessment<br />

battery (e.g., together with mental ability<br />

and broad personality evaluations) is<br />

recommended. Integrity tests can then be<br />

used as an additional source of information<br />

to be considered during the recruitment<br />

interview.<br />

Shopping for an Integrity Test?<br />

Page 10.<br />

There are a number of key factors an<br />

organisation should consider when deciding<br />

on the sort of integrity test to adopt.<br />

Niehoff and Paul (2000) suggested that<br />

care must be taken in order to select tests<br />

that have been carefully validated, as there<br />

are many integrity tests, but few have rigorous<br />

reliability and validity. In addition,<br />

tests differ substantially in their degree of<br />

sophistication; some tests use such measures<br />

as ʻlie scalesʼ, internal consistency<br />

analysis, social desirability scales, and<br />

even a measure that detects hesitations in<br />

responding. As professionals, it is important<br />

for organisational and occupational<br />

psychologists to ask more about the testʼs<br />

validation criteria and the internal mechanisms<br />

used to detect dishonest responses.<br />

When applying integrity tests in this country,<br />

it is important that they are configured<br />

to the <strong>Australian</strong>-English language and<br />

jargon. To date, with the exception of few,<br />

most integrity tests do not offer a version<br />

specifically configured for Australia.<br />

Furthermore, as most integrity tests come<br />

in a computerised form, it is recommended<br />

that the chosen test will have a function<br />

that adapts to the individual literacy level<br />

of the test taker. This quality increases the<br />

accuracy of the test results as it minimises<br />

biases resulting from allowing examineesʼ<br />

too much time to think of the ʻrightʼ<br />

answer.<br />

Another important consideration is the<br />

utility of an internet-based version of the<br />

test, as on-line integrity testing offers<br />

significant advantages. Firstly, it allows<br />

a quick turnaround, which means that<br />

testers or their clients can view the results<br />

immediately after the administration of the<br />

test. Secondly, it requires no downloads,<br />

no implementations and no maintenance<br />

from customers. As such, the internetbased<br />

integrity test can be administered<br />

from anywhere (including remote locations)<br />

at anytime with unlimited locations<br />

being used concurrently, as access to the<br />

test is not limited to the location of the<br />

computer(s) where it has been installed.<br />

Finally, an internet-based version also<br />

means that the price is more cost-effective<br />

because there are no tangible costs such as<br />

printing, data entry, couriers, etc.<br />

A final consideration to take into account<br />

when choosing a test is its track record.<br />

Ask the provider for a list of clientele and<br />

for permission to contact them. It is also<br />

important to ʻfeelʼ the test in a trial run,<br />

ensuring that it is user-friendly and that<br />

the results, reports and narrative make<br />

sense. Figure 4 summarises the requirements<br />

of good integrity tests.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!