Personality testing and workplace training

Exploring stakeholders, products and purpose in Western Europe

H. Lundgren, B. Kroon, R.F. Poell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore how and why personality tests are used in workplace training. This research paper is guided by three research questions that inquire about the role of external and internal stakeholders, the value of psychometric and practical considerations in test selection, and the purpose of personality test use in workplace training.
Design/methodology/approach
This research paper uses multiple-case study analysis. Interviews, test reports, product flyers and email correspondence were collected and analyzed from publishers, associations, psychologists and human resource development (HRD) practitioners in Germany, the UK and The Netherlands between 2012 and 2016.
Findings
Themes emerge around industry tensions among practitioners and professional associations, psychologists and non-psychologists. Ease of use is a more important factor than psychometrics in the decision-making process. Also, practitioners welcome publishers that offer free coaching support. In the process of using tests for development rather than assessment, re-labeling takes place when practitioners and publishers use positive terms for personality tests as tools for personal stocktaking and development.
Research limitations/implications
Despite extensive data collection and analysis efforts, this study is limited by its focus on a relatively small number of country cases and stakeholders per case.
Practical implications
By combining scientific evidence with practical application, stakeholders can take first steps toward more evidence-based HRD practice around personality testing in workplace training.
Originality/value
Little academic literature exists on the use of personality testing in workplace training. Without a clear understanding of the use of personality testing outside personnel selection, the current practice of personality tests for developmental purposes could raise ethical concerns about the rights and responsibilities of test takers.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)198-221
JournalEuropean Journal of Training and Development
Volume41
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Stakeholders
Personality tests
Workplace training
Testing
Human resource development
Psychometrics
Multiple case study
Industry
Ease of use
Professional associations
Electronic mail
Germany
Evidence-based
Labeling
Data collection
Decision-making process
Factors
Responsibility
Personnel selection
Design methodology

Cite this

@article{92d1fbbd154d4297bd40f6232a908fdf,
title = "Personality testing and workplace training: Exploring stakeholders, products and purpose in Western Europe",
abstract = "PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how and why personality tests are used in workplace training. This research paper is guided by three research questions that inquire about the role of external and internal stakeholders, the value of psychometric and practical considerations in test selection, and the purpose of personality test use in workplace training.Design/methodology/approachThis research paper uses multiple-case study analysis. Interviews, test reports, product flyers and email correspondence were collected and analyzed from publishers, associations, psychologists and human resource development (HRD) practitioners in Germany, the UK and The Netherlands between 2012 and 2016.FindingsThemes emerge around industry tensions among practitioners and professional associations, psychologists and non-psychologists. Ease of use is a more important factor than psychometrics in the decision-making process. Also, practitioners welcome publishers that offer free coaching support. In the process of using tests for development rather than assessment, re-labeling takes place when practitioners and publishers use positive terms for personality tests as tools for personal stocktaking and development.Research limitations/implicationsDespite extensive data collection and analysis efforts, this study is limited by its focus on a relatively small number of country cases and stakeholders per case.Practical implicationsBy combining scientific evidence with practical application, stakeholders can take first steps toward more evidence-based HRD practice around personality testing in workplace training.Originality/valueLittle academic literature exists on the use of personality testing in workplace training. Without a clear understanding of the use of personality testing outside personnel selection, the current practice of personality tests for developmental purposes could raise ethical concerns about the rights and responsibilities of test takers.",
author = "H. Lundgren and B. Kroon and R.F. Poell",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1108/EJTD-03-2016-0015",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "198--221",
journal = "European Journal of Training and Development",
issn = "2046-9012",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

Personality testing and workplace training : Exploring stakeholders, products and purpose in Western Europe. / Lundgren, H.; Kroon, B.; Poell, R.F.

In: European Journal of Training and Development, Vol. 41, No. 3, 2017, p. 198-221.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Personality testing and workplace training

T2 - Exploring stakeholders, products and purpose in Western Europe

AU - Lundgren, H.

AU - Kroon, B.

AU - Poell, R.F.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how and why personality tests are used in workplace training. This research paper is guided by three research questions that inquire about the role of external and internal stakeholders, the value of psychometric and practical considerations in test selection, and the purpose of personality test use in workplace training.Design/methodology/approachThis research paper uses multiple-case study analysis. Interviews, test reports, product flyers and email correspondence were collected and analyzed from publishers, associations, psychologists and human resource development (HRD) practitioners in Germany, the UK and The Netherlands between 2012 and 2016.FindingsThemes emerge around industry tensions among practitioners and professional associations, psychologists and non-psychologists. Ease of use is a more important factor than psychometrics in the decision-making process. Also, practitioners welcome publishers that offer free coaching support. In the process of using tests for development rather than assessment, re-labeling takes place when practitioners and publishers use positive terms for personality tests as tools for personal stocktaking and development.Research limitations/implicationsDespite extensive data collection and analysis efforts, this study is limited by its focus on a relatively small number of country cases and stakeholders per case.Practical implicationsBy combining scientific evidence with practical application, stakeholders can take first steps toward more evidence-based HRD practice around personality testing in workplace training.Originality/valueLittle academic literature exists on the use of personality testing in workplace training. Without a clear understanding of the use of personality testing outside personnel selection, the current practice of personality tests for developmental purposes could raise ethical concerns about the rights and responsibilities of test takers.

AB - PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how and why personality tests are used in workplace training. This research paper is guided by three research questions that inquire about the role of external and internal stakeholders, the value of psychometric and practical considerations in test selection, and the purpose of personality test use in workplace training.Design/methodology/approachThis research paper uses multiple-case study analysis. Interviews, test reports, product flyers and email correspondence were collected and analyzed from publishers, associations, psychologists and human resource development (HRD) practitioners in Germany, the UK and The Netherlands between 2012 and 2016.FindingsThemes emerge around industry tensions among practitioners and professional associations, psychologists and non-psychologists. Ease of use is a more important factor than psychometrics in the decision-making process. Also, practitioners welcome publishers that offer free coaching support. In the process of using tests for development rather than assessment, re-labeling takes place when practitioners and publishers use positive terms for personality tests as tools for personal stocktaking and development.Research limitations/implicationsDespite extensive data collection and analysis efforts, this study is limited by its focus on a relatively small number of country cases and stakeholders per case.Practical implicationsBy combining scientific evidence with practical application, stakeholders can take first steps toward more evidence-based HRD practice around personality testing in workplace training.Originality/valueLittle academic literature exists on the use of personality testing in workplace training. Without a clear understanding of the use of personality testing outside personnel selection, the current practice of personality tests for developmental purposes could raise ethical concerns about the rights and responsibilities of test takers.

U2 - 10.1108/EJTD-03-2016-0015

DO - 10.1108/EJTD-03-2016-0015

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 198

EP - 221

JO - European Journal of Training and Development

JF - European Journal of Training and Development

SN - 2046-9012

IS - 3

ER -