Hi friends and seniors,
I am usually a dormant member of this group for the last two and a half years in terms of posting topics. Very few... hardly ten.
This question, "Value of Certification in Psychometric Testing: Do they really worth?" has been hovering in my mind for the last two years. I talked to dozens of professors, HODs, consultants, and organizational psychologists in India, and I found that most of them have answers directly related to their business needs. I found these answers highly predictable. For example, all consultants, trainers, or organizations involved in giving such certification said that certification is a must from every aspect (functional, human, and legal) regardless of your educational background if you want to administer, interpret, or develop psychometric tests.
There is another group - professors of psychology and independent consultants who use these tests for some purpose - and they all agree, without exception, that certification adds very little value or is worthless from a functional point of view if you are already familiar with theories and assessment principles. It may be helpful from a commercial point of view (a person with certification would have greater value in the job market than a person without it).
Lastly, the third group - HR people - who use it in some way are confused. They do not know whether certification adds value or not.
After conducting this survey in India, I looked at other countries starting with the USA, then the UK, followed by France and Africa through the Middle East, and ending up in Australia.
The USA has APA (a semi-legal authority) governing these matters, where one cannot administer or interpret a Psychometric Test unless they have a Ph.D. and are registered with the regional authority (state department). No other certification is required.
The UK has BPS (a legal authority) governing these matters with clear categorization of psychometric tests based on their complexity and sensitivity, and well-defined certification levels linked with categories of tests. One cannot administer a test unless they have the relevant certification mentioned on the test admin manual. However, if somebody is a chartered psychologist, they do not need a certificate.
France has no such legal or semi-legal bodies and no certification course. So, everyone has its own standard. Most agree that anyone with a Masters in psychology with relevant discipline is qualified enough to administer and interpret these tests.
Australia is following the US pattern, but there is no legal body as yet.
African and Middle Eastern countries are quite confused and are being tossed up between US and UK standards.
Now about India...
As we all know, there is no legal or semi-legal framework as in the UK and USA, respectively. Psychology, particularly organizational psychology, is not treated as a profession here. We have the Indian Rehabilitation Council that handles the registration of clinical counselors, but no organization exists to govern the use of psychometric tests in organizational settings. I have a few questions to discuss:
1. To what extent do certification workshops conducted by various organizations add value to: a) people who already have a relevant degree in the field of psychology, and b) people who do not have any prior knowledge of psychometrics?
2. Who is (and should be) the ultimate authority to use (administer and interpret) psychometric tests in organizational settings?
3. How can we do something to pressure the government of India to frame a policy on that?
I would also like to request everybody to share your experiences and opinions on this subject.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
11I am usually a dormant member of this group for the last two and a half years in terms of posting topics. Very few... hardly ten.
This question, "Value of Certification in Psychometric Testing: Do they really worth?" has been hovering in my mind for the last two years. I talked to dozens of professors, HODs, consultants, and organizational psychologists in India, and I found that most of them have answers directly related to their business needs. I found these answers highly predictable. For example, all consultants, trainers, or organizations involved in giving such certification said that certification is a must from every aspect (functional, human, and legal) regardless of your educational background if you want to administer, interpret, or develop psychometric tests.
There is another group - professors of psychology and independent consultants who use these tests for some purpose - and they all agree, without exception, that certification adds very little value or is worthless from a functional point of view if you are already familiar with theories and assessment principles. It may be helpful from a commercial point of view (a person with certification would have greater value in the job market than a person without it).
Lastly, the third group - HR people - who use it in some way are confused. They do not know whether certification adds value or not.
After conducting this survey in India, I looked at other countries starting with the USA, then the UK, followed by France and Africa through the Middle East, and ending up in Australia.
The USA has APA (a semi-legal authority) governing these matters, where one cannot administer or interpret a Psychometric Test unless they have a Ph.D. and are registered with the regional authority (state department). No other certification is required.
The UK has BPS (a legal authority) governing these matters with clear categorization of psychometric tests based on their complexity and sensitivity, and well-defined certification levels linked with categories of tests. One cannot administer a test unless they have the relevant certification mentioned on the test admin manual. However, if somebody is a chartered psychologist, they do not need a certificate.
France has no such legal or semi-legal bodies and no certification course. So, everyone has its own standard. Most agree that anyone with a Masters in psychology with relevant discipline is qualified enough to administer and interpret these tests.
Australia is following the US pattern, but there is no legal body as yet.
African and Middle Eastern countries are quite confused and are being tossed up between US and UK standards.
Now about India...
As we all know, there is no legal or semi-legal framework as in the UK and USA, respectively. Psychology, particularly organizational psychology, is not treated as a profession here. We have the Indian Rehabilitation Council that handles the registration of clinical counselors, but no organization exists to govern the use of psychometric tests in organizational settings. I have a few questions to discuss:
1. To what extent do certification workshops conducted by various organizations add value to: a) people who already have a relevant degree in the field of psychology, and b) people who do not have any prior knowledge of psychometrics?
2. Who is (and should be) the ultimate authority to use (administer and interpret) psychometric tests in organizational settings?
3. How can we do something to pressure the government of India to frame a policy on that?
I would also like to request everybody to share your experiences and opinions on this subject.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Psychometric Test - This is a totally blind game; nothing works in practice.
I did the Predictive Index and Thomas profiling; both have failed in my statistical data analysis to establish their utility to improve morale, motivation, recruitment, and organizational behaviors, etc., whatever they promised during the introduction.
Your analysis is absolutely correct in all aspects that there are government-approved agencies that govern and regulate such practices for their validity in Western countries. However, in third-world countries, there is no legally approved accrediting agency that validates such practices as foolproof on a sound scientific basis.
The funny part of such foolish practices is we cannot claim damages from the agencies promoting these baseless concepts because there is no regulation to monitor and regulate the deliverables they promise and support our claim for failure to perform.
There is no penalty clause in any of these tools for wrongdoing and assured results. Therefore, we should not be surprised if in the coming years, our Indian HR professionals approve one fine day the Art/Science/Technologies of Palmistry and Astrology as one of the greatest tools for HR intervention. Every HR manager will become a palmist and astrologist the very next day and it will become an essential qualification for HR managers in India.
In the same forum, I came across a Yoga Guru question for not being positive to recruit yoga as an essential HR tool. Many of our HR talents in our fraternity from India advocated the utility of Yoga in HR practices to support his version. What does Yoga have to do with HR? Is it the employer's baby to force employees to do yoga exercises and appreciate wasting office time? Instead, the employer can offer free Yoga club memberships to his employees but that does not mean the HR manager starts yoga classes in the office. I was amazed by the response and IQ level of these followers of Yoga as an HR practice, who are willing to accept anything in the name of HR practice as a tool to bring improvement in employees' physical and mental health.
Psychology is a serious business dealing with mental illness. What will HR managers do with mentally ill employees? Are they authorized to prescribe medicine or hospitalize employees and create a special ward in the office for employees for recreation, etc.?
Ridiculous...
Recently, I logged onto an Indian HR web magazine that published an article titled "MOOD MANAGEMENT." Is this within the HR domain? Does HR in India mean pampering employees?
With this kind of seriousness in HR practices, one day all employees in India will expect that: "HR managers should remove bees sitting on their noses."
Thanks, Mr. Pandey, for the eye-opener to our Indian HR professionals who are being bombarded with many such absurd ideas in the name of HR specialties/interventions/innovations/creativity/performance drivers, etc.
Unfortunately, no one questions the counter guarantee for the results of these tools.
Warm Regards,
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
I did the Predictive Index and Thomas profiling; both have failed in my statistical data analysis to establish their utility to improve morale, motivation, recruitment, and organizational behaviors, etc., whatever they promised during the introduction.
Your analysis is absolutely correct in all aspects that there are government-approved agencies that govern and regulate such practices for their validity in Western countries. However, in third-world countries, there is no legally approved accrediting agency that validates such practices as foolproof on a sound scientific basis.
The funny part of such foolish practices is we cannot claim damages from the agencies promoting these baseless concepts because there is no regulation to monitor and regulate the deliverables they promise and support our claim for failure to perform.
There is no penalty clause in any of these tools for wrongdoing and assured results. Therefore, we should not be surprised if in the coming years, our Indian HR professionals approve one fine day the Art/Science/Technologies of Palmistry and Astrology as one of the greatest tools for HR intervention. Every HR manager will become a palmist and astrologist the very next day and it will become an essential qualification for HR managers in India.
In the same forum, I came across a Yoga Guru question for not being positive to recruit yoga as an essential HR tool. Many of our HR talents in our fraternity from India advocated the utility of Yoga in HR practices to support his version. What does Yoga have to do with HR? Is it the employer's baby to force employees to do yoga exercises and appreciate wasting office time? Instead, the employer can offer free Yoga club memberships to his employees but that does not mean the HR manager starts yoga classes in the office. I was amazed by the response and IQ level of these followers of Yoga as an HR practice, who are willing to accept anything in the name of HR practice as a tool to bring improvement in employees' physical and mental health.
Psychology is a serious business dealing with mental illness. What will HR managers do with mentally ill employees? Are they authorized to prescribe medicine or hospitalize employees and create a special ward in the office for employees for recreation, etc.?
Ridiculous...
Recently, I logged onto an Indian HR web magazine that published an article titled "MOOD MANAGEMENT." Is this within the HR domain? Does HR in India mean pampering employees?
With this kind of seriousness in HR practices, one day all employees in India will expect that: "HR managers should remove bees sitting on their noses."
Thanks, Mr. Pandey, for the eye-opener to our Indian HR professionals who are being bombarded with many such absurd ideas in the name of HR specialties/interventions/innovations/creativity/performance drivers, etc.
Unfortunately, no one questions the counter guarantee for the results of these tools.
Warm Regards,
Sawant
From Saudi Arabia
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
HR Trends - Global HR practices.doc