There has been a lot of talk this week about Latvian Airline, Air Baltic, introducing a scheme to allow travellers to be seated according to their mood. The idea is that passengers can be seated according whether they’d like to work, relax or chat, and even the topic of conversation can be pre-booked online- this really is the future!
This to me, raises some really interesting questions – and let’s face it – concerns. Like for instance, am I allowed to talk to someone for some of the time if I’ve signed up to work? If I get sick of gardening chit chat, can I ignore my fellow passenger for the remainder of my flight? What if the topic is interesting, but I find the individual arrogant, rude and annoying?
All this got me thinking about whether Air Baltic (does that name not conjure up images of freezing aircon and shaking chills?) would not be better matching passengers on personalities and then letting them work it out for themselves.
In last week’s poll, we asked people what they thought of personality tests. 71% of respondents stated that they felt that personality tests were a great way to confirm unique strengths, while 29% concluded that they were a bunch of psychobabble. What was interesting were the reasons that people gave for their dislike of these assessments. In no particular order these were:
All of these points are to my mind extremely valid, and really bring to light the importance of educating all test users and clients as to what tests to use, how the process works and what tests can help to determine.
Choosing a well validated, well researched and reputable personality test is absolutely essential, regardless of the application. Test bias can be dramatically reduced by using the right test and the right interpreter, and most tests have mechanisms to identify respondent faking.
Extensive psychological research into personality testing has shown that tests tend to be modest to good predictors of behaviour, and that they offer very strong predictive power when combined with other assessment tools such as interviews. Tests are not perfect, and even if they were, they are not designed to predict what someone will do at all times in every situation, they depend on the self-awareness of the test taker, and they don’t take account of abilities or experience. It is for this reason that in selection, personality tests should not be used in isolation, but rather as part of a set of assessment methods, usually including interviews and reference checks as a minimum.
However, personality tests can provide an invaluable method of really exploring the strengths and capabilities of respondents, and can provide the insight to help employers identify that all-too-elusive employee-role or employee-organisation ‘fit’. In career guidance, development or counselling, tests can act as a catalyst to help clients really explore their strengths and interests, and help to guide them to a position where they are likely to be happier and more effective.
As seen by the 71% of poll respondents, tests are becoming increasingly more popular, and employers are progressively determining that they are the most effective way of really gauging attitude and probable behaviour.
To my mind, the real challenge for Air Baltic might be to determine a method for effectively matching personalities with one another. In my opinion, this is an area that would merit from more attention in organisational selection scenarios also. Do you consider behavioural styles when selecting people for your organisation, or matching candidates to roles or leaders to subordinates?
Don’t forget, the Ignite Your True Potential Promotion will end on Friday 29th June 2012! You can win a complete Psychometric Package that is all about YOU! PLUS a one-on-one consultation with our organisational psychologist and expert in EQ, total prize value of $1,000. To find out more information, click here.
