| Join us for a Webinar on June 22 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Posts Tagged ‘personality test distributor’
HRM Webinar: How Chinese are the Chinese? A look at Personality Tests for the China
Wednesday, May 19th, 2010
Free Training in Psychometric Tests in Hong Kong & Singapore
Friday, March 26th, 2010
PsychometricAssessment.com / PsyAsia International offer Free Psychometric Testing Course in Hong Kong & Singapore
Introduction to Psychometric Testing Course: Hong Kong, 4 May 2010; Singapore, 11 May 2010
PsyAsia International is Asia’s independent Leader in Psychometric Test products and Training. We choose to distribute only the world’s best, most validated psychometric assessments and offer locally relevant, world-class training in psychometrics. The Introduction to Psychometrics Workshop expands on PsyAsia’s expertise in Psychometric Training in Asia by offering a course geared to those with very little experience or understanding in Psychometrics. Many first time clients don’t understand why they need to be careful in their choice or use of psychometrics and many do not understand why training is a necessity in competent test use.
This one-day course aims to provide experienced-based training in an accessible and economical way. The course is easy to understand and yet covers many of the important issues to be aware of when choosing and using psychometric tests. Given our passion for Asia and our passion for the competent use of psychometric tests in Asia, PsyAsia makes no profit on this course. We charge delegates a small fee that reflects the cost of the hotel venue (including buffet lunch and refreshments) where the training is held as well as materials that we provide to the delegates. What’s more, if you later decide to attend one of our accreditation courses in Psychometrics, we will issue you with a discount code that reduces your course fee by the amount you paid for this course!
|
|||
The history of psychometric testingTo view full course details and to register, please click here.
Free Psychometric Test Webinars by PsyAsia to showcase test and training products
Saturday, March 20th, 2010PsyAsia International is pleased to announce that until the end of March we will be offering free daily webinars to showcase our product range. Their will be no set agenda. The agenda will be set by attendees. Please note however that product knowledge may differ depending on which of our consultants is running the webinar. Come along and chat with our consultants, see the Saville Consulting Wave, Identity Personality Assessment and the Apollo Profile in action. Ask questions about training and consulting options and so forth!
For times and to register, please click here…
Psychometric Webinar – Amazing Apollo Profile Personality Assessment
Wednesday, March 17th, 2010The Amazing Apollo Profile
This free webinar will be facilitated by Mr. Jim Bowden, the developer of the Apollo Profile. The session will be interactive (provided attendees kit themselves out with headphones and a mic!) and Jim will present numerous interesting case studies.
The webinar will cover the following:
• Introduction: The Amazing Apollo Profile- can transform Recruitment, Staff Development, and Organisation Performance –Client example
• Apollo Questionnaire – valid/reliable/comprehensive
• Why is Apollo amazing? Apollo Advantages
• Using and interpreting of Apollo reports with anecdotes
• Recruitment – Accurate, easy, low cost – Case Study using Apollo Best Match in China for filtering 12,000 applicants for 40 Graduate level jobs
• Training and Development – Unique Apollo report PLUS downloadable solutions. Convenient, low cost, motivating
• Organisation Development. Benchmarking: Can analyse and identify current corporate strengths and weaknesses – then create high performing models/culture, identify engagement issues – case studies
• Customising: Develop models that work specifically for your organisation. If your organisation is serious about leadership through people.
• Integrate everything together with flexible multi-purpose Internet Online solutions. Use your own competencies frameworks and vocabulary – examples
• Special Offer – have to listen to Webinar to find out!
Date: Monday, May 17, 2010
Time: 12:30 PM – 1:30 PM SGT
After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar.
System Requirements
PC-based attendees
Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP, 2003 Server or 2000
Macintosh®-based attendees
Required: Mac OS® X 10.4.11 (Tiger®) or newer
Space is limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now at:
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/522465752
Psychometric Test Experts, PsyAsia International Announce Sponsorship of the Singapore HR Congress
Thursday, March 11th, 2010PsyAsia International is pleased to once again be supporting Singapore’s Human Resource professionals as a sponsor of the Singapore Human Resources Institute’s Annual Human Resource Congress.
The Singapore HR Congress and Business-Connect Exposition 2010 will address the newly derived term of HR TransmutationTM and explore the topic in deeper context. The current economic churning has made it explicitly clear that industry is not just facing another downturn but it is accompanied by impactful structural, demographic and mindset changes across industry and top management cannot afford to respond with anything less than a complete overhaul of the system to survive and sustain. Renowned speakers and leaders from the HR fraternity will share their experiences and provide useful insights on the know-how of managing paradoxes in a turbulent world.
PsyAsia’s clients are entitled to a 35% discount on the price of conference tickets. Please contact us in the first instance to avail of this special offer.
“A strong and capable HR community can be the catalyst and change agents to initiate and implement people development efforts in organisations, and help build stronger capabilities amongst our business leaders and managers.”
PM Lee Hsien Loong
11th World HR Congress 2006 organised by SHRI
PsyAsia International is Asia’s leading independent distributor of Psychometric Tests of Personality and Aptitude. From offices across Asia, including Singapore and Hong Kong, our psychologists assist the world’s top organisations and local governments to recruit, select, assess and retain the best employees. Our services are only offered by fully registered organisational psychologists with years of experience in their field. PsyAsia also offers world-class training in Psychometric Testing in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Online.
Identity Personality Test Research in Hong Kong
Wednesday, February 10th, 2010Identity Questionnaire Research Results – A synopsis
No reproduction without permission.
Introduction to the Study and Outline of the Phases
In September 2008, Quest Partnership Ltd, PsyAsia International, and the Hong Kong Institute of Vocational Education (HKIVE) embarked on a project to translate the Identity Self-Perception Questionnaire from English into traditional Chinese. The reason for translating the questionnaire was to produce an occupationally focused personality questionnaire that could be used in China and Hong Kong SAR. At the same time, Quest were also producing a new Careers Report for the Identity system. This enabled the volunteer students to gain useful feedback on their questionnaire. The project was headed up by Max Choi of Quest Partnership Ltd and Dr. Graham Tyler of PsyAsia International. Max Choi is an Occupational Psychologist with BPS chartered status and has substantial experience in designing and validating tests. Graham Tyler is a registered psychologist and has a PhD based on psychometric assessment and validating tools for predicting performance at work in Asia.
The research was split into several stages:
• Translations – involving the translation and back-translation of Identity into Simplified and Traditional Chinese by professional staff at HKIVE.
• Pilot Study – using the translated Identity questionnaire.
• Phase 1 Testing – a sample of participants at HKIVE completed the Chinese Identity questionnaire.
• Phase 2 Re-testing – participants were asked to complete the questionnaire for a second time one month later i.e. re-testing to determine the reliability of the questionnaire items.
• Data Cleansing – first to identify and remove ‘rogue’ answer sheets from students who did not complete the questionnaire seriously.
• Data Analysis & Results– analysis of the data and understanding the results.
• Producing Norms and Building this into the New Career Focus Report – norms were produced based on these Hong Kong students. This norm group was used for the new Career Focus Report which is now available for the Hong Kong education sector.
• Translation into Simplified Chinese – the project to translate the Identity Questionnaire into simplified Chinese and have it available online was completed in December 2009.
Translations
In September 2008, the questionnaire was translated into both Traditional and Simplified Chinese by 4 individuals at the HKIVE who hold the British Psychological Society’s Level A and B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. This process was supervised by Dr. Graham Tyler, who has a good understanding of principles behind item construction. The translated questionnaire was sent to the test publishers (Quest Partnership Ltd) in the UK for evaluation and further refinement, working with Chinese natives now resident in the UK.
The translated questionnaire was then back-translated into English by lecturers in the English language department at the HKIVE. Independent back-translation provides the quality check of how effective the translation has been. The back-translation was checked against the original version of the questionnaire to ensure it retained its overall theme and meaning. A few items achieved poor back-translations and these were reviewed and improved and back-translated again to check that the translation had improved. The traditional Chinese translation took precedence on the basis that this would be evaluated first and then simplified Chinese would follow at a later date.
Pilot Sample
20 students at VTC completed the translated traditional Chinese questionnaire. They also completed a form which collected their feedback on items that they did not fully understand or where they felt the wording could be improved. This feedback was analysed and a few minor improvements were made for the next phase.
Phase 1 Testing
In October 2008, a large sample of 800+ Chinese students at HKIVE completed the Traditional Chinese Identity Questionnaire. Most of these administrations were conducted under standardised test administration conditions during classes. The final sample after data cleansing consisted of 421 students.
Phase 2 Testing
One month later many of the Chinese students from the Phase 1 testing were invited to complete the questionnaire again. The test-retest study is based on 206 students who completed the questionnaire again. Most of these administrations were conducted under standardised test administration conditions during classes.
Students were entered into a monetary prize draw as an incentive to take part in the research. Also, students received a Career Focus Report from their completed questionnaire.
Data Cleansing
Identifying ‘Rogue’ Responses
We placed stringent requirements on the data that could be used. It was evident that a proportion of the student responses were not usable. This may be as a consequence of asking the students to complete the questionnaire as part of class work. So although they were volunteers, the request during class time may have resulted in some slightly ‘reluctant’ volunteers. Also, others may have become bored after starting the questionnaire and may not have taken the whole questionnaire seriously, unlike real candidates applying for jobs. So a small minority will complete the questionnaire in a non-serious manner. Only a few rogue answer sheets can be visually identified (e.g. students who have put in the same response for the whole column or making neat zig-zag patterns on the answer sheet). So we needed to employ more sophisticated techniques to identify other ‘rogue’ respondents in order to remove these from our sample before conducting further analysis on the data.
Removing Answer Sheets with Too Many ‘3’ Responses
The instructions for completing the questionnaire clearly states that 3 should be used sparingly. But for this Chinese student sample, the mean number of ‘3’s chosen was 30.4, with a Standard Deviation (SD) of 32. For our UK sample however, the mean number of ‘3’s chosen was 9.85, with a SD of 15. It was decided that participants who responded with over 71 unsure ‘3’ responses would be removed from the sample i.e. this means that they are putting down ‘3’ to over a third of their questionnaire items – which is much too high. A caveat to this however is that given the “middle-way” philosophy in the East, it can generally be anticipated that central tendency responding will be higher in China than in the West.
Removing Answer Sheets with Random Responses
We employed two established methods to detect answer sheets which were being completed randomly i.e. the True Response Inconsistency (TRIN) and the Variable Response Inconsistency (VRIN) methods. Both methods are based on paired items which are highly associated in that knowing an individual’s response to one item will provide a very high level of prediction of their response to the other item. Therefore, when a person scores below a certain threshold with many paired items, we can be confident that their responses to the questionnaire have been random.
Data Analysis and Results
Test Re-Test Reliability
At Phase 2, students completed the Identity Questionnaire again about one month after the Phase 1 original completion of the questionnaire; we were able to conduct a Test-Retest analysis. This allows us to look into the stability or reliability of the questionnaire over time.
The final sample size for the test-retest was 206 after all the data cleansing procedures were conducted. Overall the vast majority of Identity scales were reliable. A small number of scales were below the benchmark of .70. However we need to be reminded that we are dealing with a translated questionnaire so we would expect some loss of reliability compared to the original questionnaire. So the original English Identity questionnaire sets the upper limits.
The original English Identity single scale test-retest coefficients ranged from .77 to .92 (based on a test-retest sample of 121). For the translated traditional Chinese questionnaire the test-retest coefficients ranged from .58 to .87. Seven of the 36 Identity questionnaire scales reported less than ideal test-retest coefficients:
• Consultative .57
• Psychological .61
• Empathy .57
• Adaptability .60
• Theoretical .62
• Rational .59
• Reflective .58
Interestingly, it might be argued that these scales are less meaningful to this student sample and different results are likely to be obtained in a business sample.
Internal Consistency Reliability
Another method to determine reliability is to look at internal consistency of each scale to see how well items within a scale correspond with one another. From this analysis we identified nine scales at a lower range of reliability coefficients than our ideal of 0.7:
• Social Presence .60
• Direct .61
• Empathy .58
• Adaptability .60
• Decisive .67
• Self Potency .53
• Self Protecting .62
• Social Desirability .63
• Reflective .43
Combining the two methods of establishing reliability it was useful to see if there were any scales that would have both low test-retest and low internal consistency reliability. The following 2 scales had lower reliabilities than ideal:
• Empathy
• Adaptability
We will be collecting more data so with more extensive use of the tool with participants who will be completing the questionnaire for non-research purposes we do expect the reliabilities to improve.
Study Results: Comparisons with UK Data
The results for this group of Hong Kong students were compared against the UK working population and also against a group of UK A Level applicants and Final Year Students for a Design & Technology course at a UK university.
The group of Hong Kong students compared to the other groups tended to be slightly lower on the following scales:
• Independent
• Critical
• Multi-Tasking
• Variety Seeking
• Determined
• Self Potency
• Positive
However, it is not possible to determine exactly why these differences are found as there are a range of variables as to how the groups differ from each other e.g. motivational aspects as the students were volunteers rather than real job applicants; age differences; cultural and educational experience differences; work experience differences.
Producing Norms & Developing the Career Focus Report
A set of Hong Kong student norms has been established (N= 421) and more data will be added to this at a later date when it becomes available.
At the same time as this research Quest Partnership also developed a new Career Focus Report for Identity and participating students were provided with a report. This new report has been developed with educational clients in mind but can be used by other clients supporting individuals with career guidance. Currently, the report can be normed against the UK working population and the Hong Kong students.
Translation into Simplified Chinese
The project then made traditional Chinese available as an online solution for clients with a view to collect on-going norms data and to work with any clients who can support with validation studies. In December 2009 the simplified Chinese version was also made available online.
If you are interested in training to use the Identity Questionnaire or if you would like to work with PsyAsia in distributing this assessment, please do get in touch with us.
Psychometric Tests in Singapore
Friday, November 20th, 2009The Market for Psychometrics in Singapore
There are so many Psychometric Tests on the market in Singapore now, the task of choosing the right one is not easy. Choice is always a good thing, however as humans we often look for easy or stereotypical ways of making those choices and they are not always the best ones to make. For example, a client of ours was preparing for an upcoming team-building session. He approached us asking if we had a certain test that he could use in that session. Our answer was that we don’t supply that test for various very good reasons. The client’s response was “but so many people use it”. This is a typical response. Another potential client had been looking around in Singapore for Psychometric Personality Tests to use in his training sessions as an added benefit. He categorically advised us that he was not interested in validity and was looking for something simple and cheap! The reality here is that at best he is wasting his time and the time of those who will complete his tests. At worst and most likely, his trainees will be led to believe things about themselves which frankly may not be true (reliable or valid!).
Science, Psychology, Psychometrics and the Real World of Business
As busy professionals we often assume that if lots of other people are using a test it must be a good one. This is a huge mistake. Our evolution has programmed us to be seduced by glossy advertising materials and confident, friendly salespeople. On the other hand, we have a tendency to be turned off by less glossy scientific figures, statistics and perhaps psychologists such as myself who speak about the science and real value behind a test, its validity! Ultimately then, both our clients and ourselves as psychologists have problems to overcome!!
Psychologists have to be able to explain in more “glossy” terms about the technical properties of a test and our clients, usually the HR and aligned professions, are invited to turn their ears our way for a little while, just long enough to get the notion that there is more to a psychometric test than meets the eye!
Technical Properties of Psychometric Tests
When we talk of the technical properties of a psychometric test, we are referring to things such as its reliability and validity as well as how it was constructed. If a test is constructed well, it will take time. Not months, often years. The test will also evolve over time such that more and validity data will be added to its manuals. This process is costly, hence good tests cost money.
If you come across cheap tests, that should start to ring alarm bells. It’s possible to write a few questions on a napkin in a restaurant and call it psychometric and even try to sell it. If it looks good and the questions look relevant perhaps it will sell and gain a huge following. But how reliable is that test?
In other words, can it provide consistent measurement of your candidate? If your bathroom scales provide different results each time you weight yourself you take them back and say these are not reliable. Likewise with a test, you need to ensure that it is consistently assessing the constructs that it purports to assess. We often come across new clients who are shocked when we tell them that good personality tests often contain around 200 questions. However, buyer beware! We know that the longer the test, the more reliable the results (as long as it is not so long that the candidate falls asleep!).
An unreliable test can not be a valid test, hence reliability is a precursor to validity. However, validity is arguably the most important aspect of a test. You choose to use tests because you want them to illustrate where a candidate stands in terms of their ability or personality or in order to predict how your candidate will perform or behave in a job. The test’s ability to meet this need is referred to as validity.
Some tests on the market are simply more valid that others. In fact, one test in the past year has proven to be more valid than all other tests it was compared with on the market! How come users stay with their current test then? Perhaps because of preference, habit, price, mass-following and so on. However, do ask yourself and your test supplier, how valid is your test – this is the single most important technical property in a psychometric test!
Sometimes tests which are more valid will be more expensive but this makes sense. If a test took a long time to develop, was developed well and by a reputable publisher and is based on well founded theories that have been researched internationally, then surely it is worth paying the extra as such a test will provide an excellent return on investment with its strong validity.
Training to use Psychometric Tests in Singapore
Properly developed psychometric tests require proper training to be used competently. If your test supplier requires that you undergo very limited or no training, this is a reflection of the test as well as their lack of understanding of psychometrics. You need to understand the concepts referred to above, as well as error in testing and how to make decisions based on test results, let alone how to feed back results properly to candidates and decision-makers. The type of questions (i.e., forced choice versus rating scales) will also dictate how you can use the results – you need to be trained to understand this! In some parts of the world (South Africa for example), only psychologists can use psychometric tests. Whilst this is a strict rule, it has its logical basis in how easy it is for untrained professionals to use tests wrongly.
Purchasing Psychometric Tests in Singapore
You may also wish to consider where you purchase your tests from, particularly in Singapore. In recent years we have seen an influx of profiteers in the industry who seek to make money but lack any depth of understanding in psychometrics or psychology at work. This will change in time as psychology in Singapore develops. For now however, be wary of this and we suggest that you only purchase psychometric tests from fully registered organisational psychologists who have a firm grounding in personality, psychometrics and psychology at work and who are answerable to professional competence and ethics boards. Many of those selling psychometric tests in Singapore are simply not answerable to anybody in terms of their conduct or competence. You can therefore not be certain that any advice they provide is relevant, up-to-date or will work in your organisation.
There are many more things to be aware of when choosing psychometric tests in Singapore. We cannot entertain them all here due to space constraints. You may wish to look out for training courses in Psychometric Assessment such as our our Psychometric Assessment at Work training which leads to the internationally recognised British Psychological Society Level A and B Certificates of Competence in Occupational Testing. Such courses will prepare you further for choosing the right test and therein avoid costly selection and development mistakes. Look for courses run by experts in psychometrics who are based in Singapore and hence have a strong understanding of test use aligned with local culture, laws and practice.
Note: some Singapore firms will ship in overseas trainers to run psychometric training. We suggest you avoid this training reseller model given that the facilitator is based overseas and is thus likely to lack knowledge of the Singapore business/legal and cultural environment for Psychometric Testing.
This article is Copyright PsyAsia International Pte Ltd.
It was originally written for Human Resources Magazine in Singapore
A shorter version of the article appears in the magazine’s November 2009 issue
Saville Consulting Wave Psychometric Test Free Trial from PsyAsia
Monday, August 3rd, 2009
Saville Consulting Wave® Professional Styles measures motives, talents, preferred culture and competency potential in one dynamic online questionnaire. It is designed for use in both selection and development, transforming the assessment process with the sophisticated use of internet technology and powerful models of effectiveness in the workplace. This comprehensive global questionnaire measures the 4 clusters, 12 sections, 36 dimensions and 108 facets of the Wave hierarchical model. Average completion time is 40 minutes.
In a 2008 co-validation study, Wave Professional Styles, outperformed the OPQ32i, NEO-PI-R, Hogan Personality Inventory 16PF5 and 15FQ+ in predicting both work competencies and overall global measures of performance. Additionally the Wave outperformed tests that should not really be used in recruitment and selection, such as the MBTI and DiSC.
For users, this higher validity enables:
- better predictions of performance
- a stronger return on investment
- accurate identification and management of talent
- highly targeted coaching
- the development of a performance culture throughout an organization
For details of the scientific validation study, please click here.
We are pleased to offer a free trial of the Saville Wave Focus Styles Questionnaire to the major HR decision-maker in Asian organisations. The trial is open until 15 August and to the first 100 applicants. Please send your full details to our Psychometrics Team by clicking here. Please provide the following:
Your full name:
Your corporate email address (free email accounts such as yahoo, gmail etc. not accepted):
Your job title:
Your company name:
Your location:
Kindly note that requests for trials from non-decision makers, those not based in Asia, those who provide inaccurate, fake date or non-corporate email addresses or those whose organisations have previously trialled the Wave will not be entertained. Thank you for your understanding.
For details on professional training to use the Saville Consulting Wave, please click on the links below:
Psychometric Assessment at Work Course – BPS Level A and B – Asia
Saville Consulting Wave Conversion Course – Asia
Choosing a local distributor for psychometric tests
Tuesday, July 21st, 2009One of the first things clients will want to know when choosing who to work with when ordering psychometric tests is “why should I choose xyz company”?
As the field of psychometrics continues to grow, overseas publishers are working hard to make inroads into local markets. Clients should therefore be wary of the expertise (or lack of it) in organisations that are distributing tests.
We firmly believe (as do publishers of high level tests such as the Saville Consulting Wave), that those in the best place to distribute psychometric tests are those who have a background in personality psychology and/or organisational psychology. In fact this premise was shared by many reputable test publishers until relatively recently.
Greed and motivation to expand market share have taken over in many cases and some test publishers have delegated test distribution to non-psychologists or those with short-course qualifications in this area.
The downsides of this are tremendous. Not only does it threaten the very integrity of the test and the industry, but it brings into the fore concerns regarding malpractice and the like.
Registered Organisational Psychologists are registered with government bodies. They therefore report to these bodies on issues involving competence. In addition to their 6-10 years of training in psychology (i.e. as much as a medical doctor!), they are bound to undergo continuous professional development and must submit proof of this on an annual basis. This means they need to attend high-level conferences, read peer-reviewed professional and academic journals and more.
Non-psychologists of course are not subject to any of the aforementioned. In fact, many clients who have come over to us from such distributors have entertained us with stories of gross negligence and incompetence of these “salespeople” who lack expertise and passion for the subject matter. A couple of examples follow:
1. A client told us how when they contacted “******** Assessments” in Hong Kong and asked for more information on how the test has 95% predictive accuracy (as published on their website). They were told that this related to 2 things. Firstly that the test has a sophisticated lie detection system and so is very accurate. A psychologist will tell you this has nothing to do with predictive accuracy! Predictive accuracy (or validity) is about using the test scores to predict work performance or something similar.
This same client was then told:
“The second form of predictive accuracy is construct validation which relates to the job prediction score”.
Again, a psychologist would point out that this salesperson is getting confused. Construct validity and predictive validity are two different forms of validity. Most importantly though, no psychometric test is 95% predictive! Psychologists know that and if they claim any different they would be reported to their board and struck off!
Unfortunately, at no time was this client provided with hard-data or evidence that this test (which is based on a theory that has not been peer-reviewed and has not been independently tested in Asia or Australia) actually predicts meaningful workplace behaviours and performance.
2. Another client told us how they contacted a non-psychologist distributor of another test brand in Singapore. They asked for information about impact of dyslexia on aptitude test scores and also wanted to know about the comparison between certain tests within that brand and those of the competition. This distributor had no idea there and then, and said he would need to go away and find out. A psychologist would not need to do this. Unless the client is asking about an obscure test, Psychologists are trained to have the answers.
As we know, there are many things to consider when choosing the right psychometric test. Issues such as reliability, validity, norm groups, standard error of measurement, cost versus validity (ROI), report options, online assessment options and so on. This short article has added to that list and suggested that the background and currency of the people in the distributorship are also important.
To cast doubt aside, it is best to work with distributors who have demonstrated their passion in psychology and psychometrics through years of training in the subject along with years of experience. Choose those holding full registration as psychologists with government/professional bodies who must undergo professional development on a continual basis. Purchasing psychometric tests from non-psychologists may amount to asking a private pilot to fly a jumbo jet. They may be able to get it off the ground (“may”!), but what happens when they encounter problems or when they try to land??!!!
