Question

Charity starts at home." If you don't think along these lines, ask the Salvation Army. A few years back, one of the Army's neighborhood offices found that it had an issue with robbery among its pot workers,the individuals who gather cash for the Army amid the Christmas season. A portion of the Army's kettlers were taking the Army's gifts previously the association had an opportunity to dole out the cash. To put a stop to the issue, Army authorities looked for the help of Dr.John Jones, executive of research for London House Management Consultants. London House is one of a few organizations that market trustworthiness tests for planned workers. 117 Although solid figures are difficult to get a hold of, the U. S. Council of Commerce trusts that upwards of 75 percent of representatives may take and that 30 percent of insolvencies originate from worker robbery. Regardless of whether these figures are overstated, nobody questions the issue is serious.Honesty-test creators say the best way to manage the issue is before laborers are contracted by subjecting them to a pre work mental test that will recognize those planned representatives who are probably going to take. James Walls, one of the originators of Stanton Corporation,which has offered composed genuineness tests for a quarter century, says that deceptive activity candidates are astute at duping potential businesses in a prospective employee meeting. " They have a method for acting that is most likely better than the generally safe individual. They have realized what it takes to be acknowledged and how to defeat the typical meeting system," he says. " The high-chance individual will get enlisted unless there is an approach to screen him." For this reason, Walls maintains,written, target tests are expected to weed out the convicts. A large number of composed genuineness tests are given yearly, on account of congressional confinements on polygraph testing. Notwithstanding being legitimate, genuineness tests are likewise practical in light of the fact that they cost just a small amount of what polygraph tests cost

QUESTIONS:-

1. how useful or informative do you think such tests are? is there use are reasonable business policy? assuming that tests like those described are valid and reliable, are they fair? explain.

2. do you think tests like these invade privacy and, if so, that this invasion is justified? explain why or why not.

3. what ideal obligations, and effects must be considered in using psychological tests as pre-employment screens? in your view, which is the most important consideration?

4. if you were an employer, would you require an employees or job applicants to pass an honesty exam? explain the moral principles that support your position.

5. what do you think a business's reaction would be if government required its executives to submit to an honesty test as a pre condition for the company's getting a government contract? if, in your opinion, the business would object, does it have any moral grounds for subjecting workers to comparable tests?

6. utilitarians would not find anything inherently objectionable about psychological tests as long as the interest of all parties were taken into account and given equal consideration before such tests were made a pre-employment screen do you think this is generally the case?

7. should there be a law prohibiting or regulating psychological tests as a pre-employment screen? should a decision to use these tests be made jointly by management and labor,or is testing for employment an exclusive employer right?

Answer 1

1. To determine the usefulness of any psychometric test we need to first ensure their reliability and validity. The tests are definitely useful if designed appropriately and can give a reasonable insight into the honesty and integrity of the candidates. There are, however, chances of the candidates giving fake responses in order to appear honest, which is definitely a drawback! The tests are seemingly fair if they are a part of the protocol and are used by the business for hiring employees at every level.

2. The tests that are chosen should be legal e.g. should not be addressing questions based on sensitive issues like sexuality, religion etc. We need to ensure that the test items are more generic and less personal so that they do not appear to be invading the privacy of the candidates. A lot of psychometric tests including personality inventories do have personal questions in order to understand the person effectively. As a protocol, the results of the psychometric tests are kept completely confidential and are not used for other purposes without the candidates consent.

3. Apart from the skill set required to perform a particular job we need to also look into the personality, integrity, honesty, stress levels, temperament, motivation and patience and need to really understand if the candidate would be a better fit in the organisations culture. The most important consideration in my view would be the personality of the person. We have multiple reliable and valid personality tests that have been effectively used for hiring purposes. Once we get an insight into the persons personality we can better understand if the candidate would be the right fit for the job and organisational culture.

4. If i get the chance i would definitely love to use the honesty tests. I will, however, not make my decision dependant on them!. I would rather combine the test with a few others and also take into consideration my personal interaction with the candidate.

5. I feel the government should look into other matters like checking whether the job is being done ethically or not or say, the revenues that are being generated are done using legal means. Even if most of the employees of an organisation are honest but some of the senior management are not, the overall results may still show high level of honesty, while the company might still engage in illegal means of generating revenue without the honest employees being aware of it. If the business objects it does have a moral ground if they are asked to disclose the personal details of the employees along with the tests. Incase the business is required to share the same with the government they should ensure that the identities of the employees are not disclosed.

6. Usually tests are done in agreement with all the parties and the results are kept confidential.

7. I don’t think there should be a law for prohibiting or regulating the psychological tests. There, however, should be laws for legally checking the tests for any sensitive questions e.g. religion/ sexuality related. The tests should undergo a legal examination before being used for measurement purposes.