Open Roles
EN
- English
- DEUTSCH
- SPANISH
- FRENCH
With widespread skills shortages, challenging global conditions and a constrained talent pool, hiring panels are understandably nervous about getting decisions right the first time. They want to make fairer, more inclusive and more confident decisions with less room for individual bias.
But traditional signals like CVs, cover letters and interview answers are becoming easier to polish due to Gen-AI, and therefore harder to trust and verify. At the same time, the range of assessment methods is growing, from situational judgement tests and simulations to work samples and psychometric testing. Panels now have more evidence than ever before, but it needs to be fed into the wider process to be reliable.
In this article, two of our experts, Michelle Scanlon and Dr Emi Saliasi, focus on psychometric testing and how to integrate its ‘science’ with the ‘art’ of interpreting results in context.
Psychometric tests play a useful part in evaluating candidates as part of the wider hiring process (which also includes interviews, reference checks, track record reviews and peer evaluations). Common examples of psychometric tests are personality and cognitive ability tests, which offer a structured, evidence-based way of understanding aspects of someone’s behaviour, skills and values. Results can indicate how a candidate is likely to behave when faced with challenging situations like ambiguity, pressure, or conflict, and can guide hiring panels towards designing more relevant or revealing interview questions.
But misusing or misinterpreting psychometric tests, or treating results in isolation, can lead to costly hiring mistakes. Results can affect a hiring panel’s perception of a person both positively and negatively. Some standardised tests rely to a degree on language, time limits and particular norm groups, so results may not always be directly comparable for non-native speakers or neurodivergent candidates. Reasonable adjustments can help address this. Even well-established tests have limitations. In self-report questionnaires, for example, candidates naturally tend to present themselves positively. Advice from a qualified expert can help ensure tests are used fairly and appropriately.
An expert in psychometrics will begin by selecting a high-quality test that’s relevant to the candidate pool. Tests should be fair, unbiased and cross-culturally valid, and the expert will decide if any adjustments or alternative formats are needed. When the test is administered, the expert will explain to the candidate what’s being measured, how data is handled, and what feedback they will receive.
Interpreting how multiple signals sit together and cross-checking against references and interview evidence can give a fuller picture. When analysing results, psychometric experts are not simply looking for binary outcomes or “scores”; they’re using the results as extra evidence to aid the decision-making process.
“Our consultants bring knowledge of the sector, the organisation and the role to the interpretation of test results, and work with specialists who understand the tools and their limitations. This matters because the same result can mean different things in different settings. A strong preference for consensus building, for example, may suit a university with shared governance and be a poor fit where fast, decisive moves are needed. Leaders everywhere need to be accepted by the community they serve, but what earns that acceptance varies: in education and research it is often scholarly standing and the respect of peers, while in society and environment it is more often a record of working alongside the people affected. Test results are most useful when read against that picture.”
When presenting to hiring panels, an expert will brief them on what the results can and cannot say, and translate them into clear and balanced insights, rather than simply a verdict.
More evidence only helps if it’s integrated carefully. Otherwise, it adds noise rather than clarity. The amount of available evidence will keep growing, and hiring panels and assessment leaders will need to act as curators of this information, focusing on deciding what matters and what weight it deserves.
In the hands of experts, technology (including Gen-AI) can strengthen the science, but the art of interpretation still rests with people. An experienced consultant makes full use of available technology, while combining it with organisational and sectoral knowledge and their own judgement. That combination remains essential to getting decisions right.
