After I learnt a lot from the job-related threads I created on nairaland ( “What is your definition of a good job?”, “How many regret mails did you get before landing your 1st job offer?” among others), I decided to throw this topic to the house.

Many companies employ the use of series of tests to select the best candidates to occupy different positions in their organizations. Personality tests, Aptitude tests( Verbal, Quantitative, Numerical, Analogy, Data interpretation, Logic, Blood relation test...), Ability tests, Decision-making tests etc are used to screen applicants.

Some job applicants claim that their strength lies in the interview stages while tests is their doom. Should we say that the companies are not fair to this category of applicants?

Many applicants with Arts background also lament over the too many mathematical problems they meet in tests.

As for me, I think tests are good for selecting the best candidates as we have come to realize that applicants that pass all these tests are “smart” individuals. More so, I perceive tests to be the fastest and most economical way of screening when there are too many applicants.
On the other hand, I feel tests aren't fair enough for the following reasons:
1. Some applicants score high in tests not because of their brilliance but because they have taken similar tests severally and many of such questions get to be repeated.

2. Some applicants perform excellently well in tests not because they are intellectually sound but because they found out where companies pick questions from and they find solutions to the questions before going for exams

3. Some aptitude test questions are unreasonable. Take for example, a company that puts very uncommon words in the antonyms and synonyms section of her job test. My question is, if the applicant eventually gets the job, will he ever use any of these vocabularies in everyday business transaction? If he does, I'm sure he will not be able to communicate with clients/customers.

4. Some applicants pass job tests not because they know the right answers to the questions but because they guess excellently ( believe me, we do have incredible guesser)

WHAT IS YOUR TAKE?

Job tests are used just to reduce the number of candidates. On a normal day, everybody is good! No one cares if you answered all the questions! The MAIN process is the INTERVIEW!

The use of administering tests is just normal especially for graduate positions with thousands of applicants. U can't expect a company to be interviewing thousands of candidates for a limited position. The use of test is just to slim down the number of candidates and most of these tests are basically just logical ones.

Conducting apt test is a very good index,I affirm.However,d I would prefer d entire process,not jst tests to b objective,starting 4rm shortlisting candidates till d final stage.

Imagine wen d whole criteria 4 a job is advertised,u meet d whole criteria nd u are nt shorlisted.hw abt dat? So,4rm shortlisting down till d final process shud b objective.everyone who meets d criteria shud b given a fair chance.

Nw concernin tests,I prefer if d company is contracting d recruitment function to any hr consulting firm,I wud suggest dat it shud b patterned in a way dat afta ur test u c ur score immediately,since most of dem r probably cbt.Alternatively,d company shud do d entire process by der hr team, just like large some large multinationals do by using taleo site etc afta which der will b a verify test.I believe at dis stage d process is to a large extent,objective.

However,competency based test shud b administered on some specialized job functions.for example,a graphic designer has no biz wit ques relating to simple interest,tax etc.

Dats my contribution.

Are PUME Good Index
For admission?

cman77: Conducting apt test is a very good index,I affirm.However,d I would prefer d entire process,not jst tests to b objective,starting 4rm shortlisting candidates till d final stage.

Imagine wen d whole criteria 4 a job is advertised,u meet d whole criteria nd u are nt shorlisted.hw abt dat? So,4rm shortlisting down till d final process shud b objective.everyone who meets d criteria shud b given a fair chance.

Nw concernin tests,I prefer if d company is contracting d recruitment function to any hr consulting firm,I wud suggest dat it shud b patterned in a way dat afta ur test u c ur score immediately,since most of dem r probably cbt.Alternatively,d company shud do d entire process by der hr team, just like large some large multinationals do by using taleo site etc afta which der will b a verify test.I believe at dis stage d process is to a large extent,objective.

However,competency based test shud b administered on some specialized job functions.for example,a graphic designer has no biz wit ques relating to simple interest,tax etc.

Dats my contribution.

good one