Return to Recent Articles
 

 Abstracts of Articles
 


Assessing the Candidate as a Whole: A Historical and Critical Analysis of Individual Psychological Assessment for Personnel Decision Making

Scott Highhouse

Personnel Psychology: A Journal of Applied Research
Volume 55, Number 2, summer 2002, pp.363-396


At other locations on this WEB site we promote the use of structured interviews when seeking to make selection decisions that have the best chance of predicting future success on the job. This article offers a different perspective: the use of individual psychological assessments in hiring and promotion decisions.

Scott Highhouse provides an interesting and informative history of the use of individual psychological assessment. He defines this type of assessment as,

... loosely defined set of procedures, similar to practices developed and performed in clinical and counseling settings, used to make recommendations for higher level hires.

It has been commonly practiced in industry to assess the candidate holistically, and, according to the author, has received little attention from textbooks on industrial psychology or personnel management.

Individual assessment differs from traditional personnel selection in that it typically relies heavily upon psychological measures and unstructured interviews, and data are often integrated via clinical intuition. (Ryan and Sackett, 1998)

Much work was done in this area by psychologists and psychiatrists in Germany, England, and the US during World War II. In Germany, Max Simoneit, the "dean" of military psychology, worked on identifying the German character. He was influenced by Ludwig Klages, who had a special interest in handwriting analysis, and Philipp Lersch, who studied facial expressions. Simoneit's assessment of officer candidate character was composed of intelligence analysis, action analysis, expressive analysis, and a live history interview. Highhouse discusses each aspect in his article.

In England, the Tavistock Group, emphasized social psychology and role-play. Leaderless groups were given a particular task to discuss, or perform, such as the building of a makeshift bridge for crossing a body of water. W. R. Bion was particularly interested in the quality of the candidates' social relationships.

In the United States, the Officer of Strategic Services program was used to select spies and saboteurs. Highhouse refers to these individuals as "cloak and dagger types." Psychologists chosen to head up this selection process. For example, Henry Murray utilized the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). He called for a subjective diagnosis of personality. All candidates were evaluated on the basis of projective tests and improvisation. They were also given an assumed identity and then interrogated, and evaluated on their ability to retain this identity under stress.

The use of projective tests was continued after World War II. These procedures were used in England, the US, and Australia. Other tests used in the US were the Tomkins Horn Picture Arrangement Test, word association tests, the Rorschach, the Draw a Man test, and the TAT. Standard Oil of New Jersey and Sears Roebuck were two leaders in this field.

The term "Assessment Center Movement" was first used in 1966 after a Management Progress Study conducted by AT &T. It was influenced by work carried out during World War II and deviated from the holistic approach, in that it emphasized standardization.

Although individual assessment remained outside of the field of personnel psychology for nearly two decades, it was rediscovered in a series of articles by Ryan and Sackett in 1987, 1989, and 1992. Highhouse mentions two books published on individual assessment in the 1990s, by Hansen and Conrad and Jeanneret and Silzer. In the final section of the article, he reviews the practices and assumptions of individual assessment, particularly holistic methods. He emphasizes that along with the assessment, the psychologist should include a hiring recommendation.

Finally, Highhouse states that very little research has been done on the efficacy of individual assessment practices. However, workshops on the practice continue to be conducted at conferences for the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychologists. Practitioners continue to flood into the area with little or no training. Highhouse calls for more research, and more accountability.


Return to Recent Articles