SHOULD YOU CHEAT ON PRE-EMPLOYMENT TESTS?
It Depends On Your Ultimate Goals
Column which ran in the
You
saw the job on Workopolis, researched the company, applied for the
position, got called in for an interview, then prepped until you knew
your stuff cold. You really, really need this gig. Now you're in the
employer's office, being grilled by human resources. Suddenly, they
hand you a personality quiz to fill out. You're faced with a dilemma:
Do you complete it? And, if so, do you answer it honestly, or try to
cheat so they hire you?
Pre-employment testing is on the rise big-time. In this era of
bottom-line fixation, companies are afraid to make mistakes in the
hiring process. The days of recruiting by gut feeling alone have gone
the way of extravagant signing bonuses and free doughnuts on Monday
morning.
Bringing on the wrong employee can be disastrous. Wasted costs run
into the thousands, including salary, benefits, severance pay,
headhunter fees, training time, hiring efforts and squandered business
opportunities - not to mention the tarnished reputation of the people
who approved the hire.
You can see why employers would want to rely on more than just
personal opinions. That's why they resort to "tests" (also known as
statistically validated inventories) to back up their hunches. It's not
that it gives them certainty, but it does add a quantifiable measure
they can point to if need be.
So where does this leave you, the applicant, when faced with a
barrage of aptitude and personality exams? On the horns of a thorny
quandary. On the one hand, the law says you don't have to complete this
type of questionnaire as part of an interview process. However,
refusing to do so could lead the employer to conclude you've got
something to hide. You can almost hear the cheers from the dozens of
other applicants who'll gladly submit to the probing.
If you do choose to respond, the issue is clear: whether to answer
as you normally would, or as you think the company wants you to. There
are pros and cons for each approach.
In favour of being honest, the argument goes something like this.
Isn't it better to be yourself and hope the employer will select you on
your merits? After all, if you try to manipulate your answers, the
tests are designed to catch you anyway.
Plus if you do end up getting hired, it means you're likely the kind
of person who'll fit in there and you don't have to pretend to be
someone you're not.
On the negative side of telling the truth, there's the harsh reality
you might get rejected because you're not exactly what the employer
wants. Something to ponder as you're wondering where your next rent
cheque will come from.
As for cheating on the tests, well, why not give yourself every
advantage in a deteriorating job market? After all, the employer's
pulling out all the stops to weed you out. Shouldn't you fight back any
way you can?
The argument against this strategy is equally compelling. Let's say
you successfully fool the testers and you accept their offer of
employment. When you show up for work they'll be expecting you to be
the person you said you were in your test profile. So either you
contort yourself to become who you claimed to be, or reveal your true
self and let the employer decide whether "the new you" is worth keeping
on the payroll.
For those of you convinced that faking the results is the better way, you might find the following books helpful. Ace the Corporate Personality Test (Edward
Hoffman, McGraw-Hill, 2000), which claims to "show you how to
dramatically improve your score and how to frame your answers to fit
the position you are seeking"; How To Master Psychometric Tests (Mark Parkinson, Kogan Page Ltd, 2001); and How to Pass Advanced Aptitude Tests (Jim Barrett, Kogan Page Ltd, October, 2002).
Some of the hints they give? Don't try to come off as impossibly
honest. You'll likely be asked several times if you've ever stolen from
an employer, sometimes in different ways. If you keep answering
"never," you'll trigger the test's internal lie scales. In other words,
you'll be outed as a potential fibber.
Another tip is to choose the highest level (eg. 5 out of 5) on any
questions relating to an outgoing nature if you're applying for a spot
in sales or marketing.
So with all this info in hand, do you try to cheat the system or let
the chips fall where they may? The dispute is summarized nicely by two
readers of the books cited above. One says, "I do not understand why
Dr. Hoffman would suggest to anyone that they misrepresent themselves
on tests of basic personality. All you will get is an offer for a job
that will not match your personality, that will make you miserable, and
at which you will eventually fail." Another counters, "I must react to
those who have taken the high moral ground in this debate relative to
'Tell the Truth.' We're talking corporations here and not Ben and
Jerry's. ... Like the vegetable vendor who sells his bushel of fruit by
placing the perfect pieces on the top; if you want cash for your
tomatoes, learn how to do likewise."
In the end, it'll come down to how badly you want the job, how well
you think you can fool the tests and how strongly you believe in
yourself, the truth and in being authentic. Because when it comes to
hiring, the best person always gets chosen. True or false?