Hippocrates made the same observation, but (coming from a medical background) labeled the categories blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile. They originated around 450 BC when Empedocles noticed that he could group peopleвЂ™s behavior into four categories which he labeled earth, water, fire, and air. Especially problematic is the widespread use of Four Quadrant (4-Q) personality tests for hiring, something I see regularly in my consulting work.ДЄ 4-Q assessment is one where the results classify you as some combination of four different options labeled as letters, numbers, colors, animals, etc. According to a 2011 NBC News article, the use of personality assessments are on the rise, growing as much as 20% annually. So if your hiring process relies primarily on interviews, reference checks, and personality tests, you are choosing to use a process that is significantly less effective than it could be if more effective measures were incorporated.ДЄnd yet thatвЂ™s how many companies operate. The table below shows the predictive validity of some commonly used selection practices, sorted from most effective to least effective, according to his latest analysis that was shared at the Personnel Testing Counsel Metropolitan Washington chapter meeting this past November: A seminal work in this area is Frank SchmidtвЂ™s meta-analysis of a centuryвЂ™s worth of workplace productivity data, first published in 1998 and recently updated.

So what are the most effective screening measures?Д®xtensive research has been done on the ability of various hiring methods and measures to actually predict job performance. Therefore, it is critical for organizations to understand what differences among individuals systematically affect job performance so that the candidates with the greatest probability of success can be hired. Among the causes are the fact that HR professionals often donвЂ™t have time to read the latest research the research itself is often present with technically complex language and data and that the prospect of introducing an entirely new screening measure is daunting from multiple angles.ДЄt the same time, anyone who has ever been responsible for hiring, much less managing, employees knows that there is a wide variation in worker performance levels across jobs. Several studies since have explored why theseВ research findings have seemingly failed to transfer to HR practitioners.

This was particularly prevalent in the area of hiring assessments, where more than 50% of respondents were unfamiliar with prevailing research findings.

The results? The area of greatest disconnect was in staffing- one of the lynchpins of HR. They surveyed 1,000 Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) members - HR Managers, Directors, and VPs -В with an average of 14 yearsвЂ™ experience. Sara Rynes, Amy Colbert, and Kenneth Brown conducted a study in 2002 to determine whether the beliefs of HR professionals were consistent with established research findings on the effectiveness of various HR practices. A decade ago, researchers discovered something that should have opened eyes and raised red flags in the business world.

Wired that way personality profile assessment tool