FAQ’s

Frequently Asked Questions

• What can the PREDICTIVE BEHAVIOR PROFILE™ test do for a company?
• How can exemplar’s predictive behavior profile™ test be any better than other selection process?”
• How can i justify the costs of the PREDICTIVE BEHAVIOR PROFILE ™ testing?”
• Superior employees are an excellent investment of any company because they:
• How do you measure whether a test is a good predictor of job performance?
• What is a good “cut-off score” to use in testing?
• Is testing legal?
• What is “adverse impact”?
• Is the exemplar predictive behavior profile™ test fair?
• How does testing compare to other selection methods?
• When should test scores not be used as a pass/ fail criterion?
• What is the best way to integrate the testing process into other selection activities?”
• Don’t people exaggerate their “good” traits on personality tests?
• Shouldn’t an aptitude test measure the same thing that the person would have to do in the job?
• What is a validation study?
• Does the personality profile measure faking or other distortions in answers?

A company’s investment in human intellectual capital is probably the single most important component of long-term profitability. Information on mental aptitudes — the same information that is one of the strongest predictors of long term success on the job — is very difficult to obtain except through standardized means. Standardized scores from a personality test help you understand how the person is likely to act at work over a long period of time—after they have shed their “best behavior” for the selection interview. Testing can provide additional information far beyond what other selection tools can give you. The insights you can gain about job candidates are often the crucial factors in making the right hiring decisions. And, scores from a personality test can give you insights about applicants that can be used to probe the most relevant topics during the final interview.

Statistical evidence shows that standardized selection testing improves upon what companies are already doing in their selection. Typically, testing is an additional component in a selection process. Time and again, we hear from our clients that testing both adds vital information to the selection process, and it helps the hiring manager or HR professional focus their personal attention on the most promising candidates. While testing initially looks like more time and work, people say it saves them time in the long run.

Testing can dramatically increase the percent of superior employees hired, while at the same time reducing the hidden risk and number of “potential claims or low performers” hired. The Predictive Behavior Profile™ has demonstrated reductions in the severity of workers compensation claims by 71% and the frequency by 27%. The savings earned by avoiding bad hires who are more likely to file a claim are significant.

– Learn more quickly so the investment in training dollars is spent wisely. – Use their job knowledge to make wise decisions to increase your company’s profitability. – Make fewer errors so they are more efficient in their everyday work. – Are observant and thoughtful about their work so they help you improve the processes and save even more money in the long run. – Are dependable and reliable. – Make better team members. – Are a good fit for the job and the company culture, so they have higher morale and are less likely to quit. – Reduce retraining and search related costs from turnover and hiring the wrong employees. – Works more safely and are less likely to file an insurance claim. – More likely to productive on the job and less likely to absorb company resource with time off the job. Published research shows that the value of an average worker is approximately 2X their annual salary, so if you could minimize the chance of hiring one “bad apple” per year, that could more than justify the cost of the selection testing program for one year. To read about how Exemplar Research Group’s Predictive Behavior Profile™ testing produced tangible savings, CLICK HERE to view Case Studies.

Typically, a correlation coefficient is used to assess whether there is a statistically significant relationship between test scores and job performance. It is represented as a small r, and ranges from -1 to +1 with no relationship being defined as r=0.00. The correlation in the example above is about r=.45. In addition to looking at the absolute value of a correlation coefficient, you also need to know if it was significant, i.e., if the probability of random error is less than 5%. Typically, if a correlation coefficient is significant at the 5% level then one asterisk will be used, e.g., r=.25*, or if it is significant at the 1% (which is an even more rigorous test of significance) then two asterisks will be used, e.g., r=.31**.

Each cut-off score is different depending upon the company and your standards — where you set the cutoff score for your testing program depends on your situation, for example: – If you set a low cutoff (test is “easy”), you will increase the number of applicants that must be interviewed, but you will have fewer “Missed Opportunities”. – If you set a higher cutoff (test is “hard”), then there is a strong likelihood that almost all of the people you interview will be “Superior Employees”, but you increase the number of “Missed Opportunities”.

Yes, testing is legal. The Predictive Behavior Profile™ is meant to be used at the pre-offer stage although it asks questions about drug and alcohol usage. The questions are not asked in a fashion that could elicit information about alcoholism or drug addiction. Both are protected under the ADA and accommodations may have to be made. Please refer to your state laws. You may also want to review the federal guidelines at www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/preemp.html. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection of 1978 both include pertinent guidelines and instruction on ways in which testing is appropriately used to make hiring decisions. If you follow these guidelines, you can feel safe that your testing program is “legal”. Should any legal questions or challenges arise, our Industrial Psychologists are ready to help you generate a rapid response.

The concept of Adverse Impact is legally defined Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection, 1978, and is overseen by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Several formulas exist to define adverse impact (e.g., 80% rule and Two Standard Deviation rule). In our society, we are concerned about whether minority groups have as good a chance to be selected into a job as majority candidates. If a testing process is judged to have adverse impact, then a minority group typically has a statistically significant lower chance of passing a selection test than someone in the majority group. If the EEOC determines that adverse impact is evident for a particular selection test, then the company would need to demonstrate evidence that the test is a valid predictor of job performance. Presence of adverse impact should not, by itself, eliminate a valid test from your hiring process.

Yes. Fair tests are ones where the research shows them to be good predictors of future job performance. High scores on fair tests mean that the person has a better chance of being a Superior Employee in the company, whereas unfair tests either don’t predict well or they over-predict or under-predict certain groups more than others. Our researchers testing program demonstrates good predictability for identifying personality traits that have a significant impact on job performance, accidents, workers compensation claims, time off the job, and driving behavior.

Studies published in leading scholarly journals support what we see repeatedly: standardized testing of aptitude is more reliable, accurate, and cost effective than other selection tools. It is a well-established scientific fact that cognitive ability is the best predictor of long term success at work. And, using valid, reliable measures of personality builds on that – it doubles your ability to predict who will be an outstanding performer on the job. For the insurance industry the test can significantly reduce the severity and frequency of claims by identifying behavior that contributes to accidents and abuse! The Exemplar Predictive Behavior Profile™ adds value, increases the odds of hiring the best employees, reduces hidden risk, the likelihood of filing a claim and hiring a bad employee, and greatly improves the hiring process.

In some hiring situations, test score information will simply be used as a guide in the interview process, providing insights about potential problem areas that need to be probed during the interview. In situations where the candidate will be driving a company vehicle, a pass-fail designation would be inappropriate if they fail the driving safety scale.

The Predictive Behaviour Profile should be used at the pre-hire stage. Along side checking references, filing out an application and asking about their job related qualifications. Some companies use it in conjunction with filling out an application and front of the face to face interview to save time and resources. Most companies find that selection tests are cost and labor effective if it is used early in the selection process. Information on personality, job performance, and safety can help an employer identify the applicants on whom to focus their time with reference checking, interviewing, providing a tour, etc. Likewise, this information gives valuable clues to help employers probe into potential problem areas during other contacts with the candidates.

To some degree, almost everyone wants to think of themselves in a positive light and most of us want others to think well of us. The scoring formulas we use to measure personality are designed to take this “self-inflating” phenomenon into account. Also, the items (questions) are designed so that not everybody answers the same way–those differences between people give us the information on which to distinguish between people and make predictions about future behavior on the job.

Sometimes YES. If the candidate must know specific things prior to being hired, the test should present questions about actual job content. For example, a bus driver should be a competent driver before being hired into the job. Aptitude test usually does not predict behavior and personality related to job performance, safety, accidents, workers compensation claims, time off the job, and driving behavior. Usually NO. In most jobs, people are given the opportunity to learn most aspects of the job during on-the-job training. In this case, it would be unfair (and possibly illegal) for a job candidate to be expected to know exactly the same things as a current employee. Therefore, aptitude tests for selection purposes are good predictors of whether the person would be quick to learn new job information, capable of using that knowledge to reason through problems in the job, and efficient in managing that type of information.

A validation study generates evidence that the pre-employment tests you are using are good predictors of future job performance. When a testing program has been “validated” you have documented assurance that the information used to make hiring decisions is predictive of future job performance and is thus fair to job candidates. Typically, a validation study includes: – A job analysis. – A rationale for tests used. – Information on how employees or job candidates perform on the tests. – A demonstrated relationship between test scores and some measure(s) of success on the job –usually supervisor ratings or other objective measures. Click here to request Exemplar Research Group’s validation study

A distortion measure also known as a faking measurement can be a measure of internal reliability or it could be a score on some sort of Lie scale such as Faking Good or Impression Management. Users believe that the distortion score provides a good indication of the degree to which the person’s true score (i.e., how God would describe them) varies from how they actually answered the inventory. Most researchers do not believe that anyone can actually do that. Just like everyone else’s products, our tests are self-report measures. We believe that everyone fakes to some degree, i.e., they want to believe that their real behavior conforms more to an ideal view of themselves, perhaps more so than how other people would see them. That type of personal enhancement is built into our scoring so that each person is compared to other people. Our personality measures do not relate to Fake Good (our measure) or Impression Management (16 PF). Also, our measures converge with same constructs on other measures like NEO and 16 PF. More importantly, they relate to important outcome criteria like GPA and job performance, so we do not believe our measures are compromised by distortion.