l-related expenses make up between 60% and 70% of most company’s total operating expenses, it just makes sense to take the time to do the job right the first time?.

In the absence of testing, most managers make hiring decisions based on their gut feelings. They also tend to hire people in their

When I accept a consulting assignment, I insist on administering psychological tests to each of the managers and salespeople in the organization before I arrive on site.

I am no stranger to psychological testing. I majored in clinical psychology in college, worked in a clinical environment in my first job following graduation and brought testing with me when I joined the business world.

Psychological testing is about the closest thing to a crystal ball I have found to predict future behavior.

Don’t misunderstand me, psychological testing is not perfect. It is not as accurate as, say, a blood test. However, it is by no means inaccurate, either. In fact, when I review an employee’s psychological testing results with them, most are amazed at how much insight I have into their strengths and weaknesses from the way they filled out the test.

In my company, we have tested over 44,000 people, so we believe our success models are second to none.

I believe you will agree with me that it’s important that managers take hiring seriously. After all, most managers resist terminating employees long after they have given up on them. Plus, when you consider that personnel-related expenses make up between 60% and 70% of most company’s total operating expenses, it just makes sense to take the time to do the job right the first time?.

In the absence of testing, most managers make hiring decisions based on their gut feelings. They also tend to hire people in their

y first job following graduation and brought testing with me when I joined the business world.

Psychological testing is about the closest thing to a crystal ball I have found to predict future behavior.

Don’t misunderstand me, psychological testing is not perfect. It is not as accurate as, say, a blood test. However, it is by no means inaccurate, either. In fact, when I review an employee’s psychological testing results with them, most are amazed at how much insight I have into their strengths and weaknesses from the way they filled out the test.

In my company, we have tested over 44,000 people, so we believe our success models are second to none.

I believe you will agree with me that it’s important that managers take hiring seriously. After all, most managers resist terminating employees long after they have given up on them. Plus, when you consider that personnel-related expenses make up between 60% and 70% of most company’s total operating expenses, it just makes sense to take the time to do the job right the first time?.

In the absence of testing, most managers make hiring decisions based on their gut feelings. They also tend to hire people in their

, say, a blood test. However, it is by no means inaccurate, either. In fact, when I review an employee’s psychological testing results with them, most are amazed at how much insight I have into their strengths and weaknesses from the way they filled out the test.

In my company, we have tested over 44,000 people, so we believe our success models are second to none.

I believe you will agree with me that it’s important that managers take hiring seriously. After all, most managers resist terminating employees long after they have given up on them. Plus, when you consider that personnel-related expenses make up between 60% and 70% of most company’s total operating expenses, it just makes sense to take the time to do the job right the first time?.

In the absence of testing, most managers make hiring decisions based on their gut feelings. They also tend to hire people in their

over 44,000 people, so we believe our success models are second to none.

I believe you will agree with me that it’s important that managers take hiring seriously. After all, most managers resist terminating employees long after they have given up on them. Plus, when you consider that personnel-related expenses make up between 60% and 70% of most company’s total operating expenses, it just makes sense to take the time to do the job right the first time?.

In the absence of testing, most managers make hiring decisions based on their gut feelings. They also tend to hire people in their

l-related expenses make up between 60% and 70% of most company’s total operating expenses, it just makes sense to take the time to do the job right the first time?.

In the absence of testing, most managers make hiring decisions based on their gut feelings. They also tend to hire people in their own image. This is not to say that there’s anything wrong with the manager’s image, but it is not wise to hire everyone with the same or similar psychological characteristics because this causes cloning. And cloning creates inertia in an organization.

Psychological testing probably won’t tell you much about a person you won’t learn after knowing them for six months to a year, but by gaining insight into a candidate’s talent and temperament before you put them on the payroll, you will save yourself both a lot of heartaches and money.

While psychological testing is not dirt cheap, it’s one heck of a lot less expensive than making a hiring mistake. All managers have learned that it costs thousands of dollars when a hiring mistake is made, and that doesn’t count all of the lost opportunity. So compare that cost to a couple of hundred dollars for a series of pre-employment tests.

What’s your track record been at changing people? If you’re like most managers, you are a miserable failure when you try to persuade or browbeat someone into being someone they are not; that is, when you try to get people to operate against the grain.

We’re all more effective at our jobs wh