TCLA Premium: Now half price (£30/month). Applications, interviews, commercial awareness + 700+ examples.
Join →

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bread" data-source="post: 241740" data-attributes="member: 33582">I'd just like to quickly chime in about the WG/SJT discussion.Standardised testing is fine and objective all you want. However, the WG and SJT are not exactly standardised.Wiki defines ST as: a test that is administered and scored in a consistent or standard manner. It follows that these tests should be easy to practice, consistent to one another, and (most importantly) have correct answers.WG: is administered by loads of different providers with different standards as to what is "correct." This makes it almost impossible to practice and do consistently well in, because correct answers fluctuate massively depending on the test provider. In addition, certain sections are weighted differently depending on the administrator or the firm.SJT: do not even get me started. These -- cappfinity in particular -- have absolutely no correct answer. The options each measure a different trait, and lord knows how the slider ones are scored. People routinely get the same quality as their best and worst after taking the same test, which is a clear indication that these tests are bullsh*t. Absolute laziness from firms tbh.And that is before taking into account how these are used in recruitment. If these were being used consistently and in a standard manner, candidates who score highest would automatically progress, right? But that is not the case. In addition, I really dislike how these are used to "predict behaviour" that is seemingly inconsistent with reality.TLDR: i am frustrated at the opaque and frankly somewhat lazy recruitment process.</blockquote>

Verification: Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread