My compliments for walking away from these kinds of abusive hurdles. Such employers undoubtedly think what they’re doing is a clever “pre-assessment” of job applicants. That is, they want to assess whether it’s worth their time to meet and assess you. They lay the burden on you, while they avoid putting their own skin in the game.
My guess is they add this step because some HR consulting firm charged them a bundle for “best methods” in recruiting. But there’s nothing “best” about abusing the job candidates those same employers complain are in short supply! Talk about trying to appeal to a candidate!
Job assessment tests come in many flavors. Tests and assessments can be useful tools for employers and job seekers. But more often than not, they’re misused. Some assessment methods are transparently ridiculous and unreasonable — and they’re not assessments at all. They’re bogus.
I think the way you’re dealing with unreasonable demands is just fine. And I don’t think anything you say to employers or recruiters is going to make them stop insisting that you jump through hoops, participate in totally one-sided “interviews,” and do free work. These employers have established a policy and a process. You’re not likely to change any of it. But it may be fun to make a point to them — a point that may hit home after they lose lots of good job applicants to their competitors.
An interview is called that because inter- means between, mutually, reciprocally, together — not one-sided. I’m looking for a good employer, and that means one that respects me enough to invest time together and reciprocally. I don’t jump for treats. Do you really have so many great candidates that you can afford to ask them all to do tricks before you’ll interview them? I’m ready to interview you if you’re ready to interview me.
HR is just a scam run by cretins. Why they would want to exclude cretins from their workplace eludes me. If they excluded all cretins, there would be no HR left! Oh, I get it. Having gotten themselves in, they then want to exclude all potential competition.
And personality tests are a pseudo-scientific scam too. They are generally proprietary tests, pushed by the companies that publish them, and marketed to HR departments as the ultimate tool for their hiring decision making. Yes, the scammers are scamming the scammers.
And more and more companies, at least as far as the HR departments and management go, don't seem really to give a fxxking rat's ass if employees are actually, you know, competent and good for doing any useful work. All they care about any more is getting a crew of sycophantic ass-licking yes-men and yes-women who can all get along with Pointy-Haired Boss.
The Harrison Assessment personality test is one such. It's just so much drivel, but apparently a whole shit-load of employers and HR people have been duped into swearing by it.
Why do they do this?
You know such jump-through-the-hoop job assessments are inappropriate and usually offensive. So do I. Why don’t employers know it?
It’s pretty simple. These are employers that don’t know how to recruit job candidates. They want you to do the work, preferably with no investment on their part. These employers want you to incur costs before they do. They want you to pay for hiring managers’ (and HR’s) ineptitude. They’re all telling you one thing: “You don’t want to work here because we have no idea how to hire.”
What are the most ridiculous or offensive assessment tests you’ve been asked to jump through? How have you responded? Is there a way to say no that keeps you in the running? If you’re an employer, how do you justify asking candidates to perform — before you invest any time in them? (That’s not a loaded question. I’d really like to know.)
SAM CONSULTING MALAYSIA