EEOC and the Thinking Pattern ProfileTM
EEOC CONSIDERATIONS:
In the highly competitive world markets, managers must make every effort to:
- reduce the time involved in locating a good employee and
- reduce the loss to the company when an employee quits or is terminated and the money invested in training is lost.
The use of screening instruments, psychological testing, personality assessments, and such has become very popular in an attempt to help he manager make better hiring decisions.
In an effort to protect the rights of the citizens, the EEOC has established three requirements for any testing instrument used as part of the hiring decision process:
- The instrument must measure what it says it measures.
- The instrument cannot discriminate according to age, race, or sex.
- Whatever the instrument measures must have a direct application to the position being applied for.
The third requirement is the responsibility of the hiring organization to monitor. The other two are conditions of the instrument itself.
EEOC REQUIREMENT #1
The instrument must measure what it says it measures.
The industry standard used for validating instruments for effectiveness and accuracy is the Minnesota Multi-Phasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). A 100% statistical concurrency between the MMPI and Hartman Value Profile, entitled “Concurrent Validity Study of Hartman’s Valumetrics and Value Science Assumptions as a Revolutionary New Basis for Modern Behavior Science Applications” was published in the VA practitioner by Dr. Leon Pomeroy and Dr. John Davis.
Another study performed by Dr. John Austin and Barbara Garwood, entitled “the Relationship of the Hartman Value Profile, Rokeach Value survey, Allpot-Vernon-Lindzey Study of Values and Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development” was presented to the National Association of School Psychologists in March, 1977. This study of the most prominent value measurement instruments validates the Hartman Value Profile in the measurement of value structures.
EEOC REQUIREMENT #2
The instrument cannot discriminate according to age, race, or sex.
AGE: The mean and standard deviation analysis of a random sampling of six (6)- one hundred (100) profile groups from a population of 22,000 profiles produced a mean standard error of 1.38 with a standard deviation of 1.56. An analysis of a 25-35 year old group yielded a mean standard error of 1.41 with a standard deviation of 1.63. An analysis of a 45-55 year old group yielded a mean standard error of 1.34 and a mean standard deviation of 1.40. These statistics produce a significant difference of zero in the groups examined.
RACE: The mean and standard deviation analysis of a random sampling of six (6) one hundred (100) profile groups from a population of 22,000 profiles produced a mean standard error of 1.35 with a standard deviation of 1.58. An analysis of a white group yielded a mean standard error of 1.26 with a standard deviation of 1.43. An analysis of a Hispanic group yielded a mean standard error of 1.44 with a standard deviation of 1,89. These statistics produce a significant difference of zero in the groups examined.
SEX: The mean and standard deviation analysis of a random sampling of six (6) one hundred (100) profile groups from a population of 22,000 profiles produced a mean standard error of 1.36 with a standard deviation of 1.49. An analysis of a male group yielded a mean standard error of 1.45 with a standard deviation of 1.62. These statistics produce a significant difference of zero in the groups examined.
To bring the Thinking Pattern Profile to your organization, call or email Dr. Connor at ktconnor@thinkingpattern.com.
