Do pre-employment tests cause candidates attrition?

Do pre-employment tests cause candidates attrition?

A major roadblock for organizations looking to introduce pre-employment tests is the threat of candidate attrition. Often, they themselves think, “Would I apply for a job that required pre-employment tests?” and oftentimes they admit that they wouldn’t. However, one must keep in mind that these are senior-level HR professionals in secure employment, not college students with no work experience. Consequently, their personal position on pre-employment test completion is unlikely to be reflective of their actual target candidate, but nevertheless can be a roadblock all the same.

In this article, I will outline how pre-employment testing impacts candidate attrition and what some best practices are for a good candidate experience.

Which tests cause attrition?

Realistically, the addition of any stage in the recruitment process is likely to cause some attrition. Indeed, if you simply handed out job offers without any vetting of any kind, you would fill vacancies almost immediately and grow exponentially. However, the purpose of a selection process is to find the best candidates, which takes time and effort from everyone involved. Therefore, to some extent, you can expect a level of attrition from any pre-employment test added to the recruitment process, but the amount of attrition can vary depending on the test itself.

Personality questionnaires, which are untimed and have no correct/incorrect answers, are the least likely to cause candidate attrition. Indeed, many candidates find the experience particularly reflective, helping them to introspect and consider their own nature. Also, because the assessment is untimed, candidates can complete them at a leisurely pace, resulting in less test or performance anxiety. This has the largest impact on attrition from candidates who have started the assessment but drop out midway through, as the laid-back testing experience is likely to be followed through to completion by most candidates.

Ability and knowledge tests, however, tend to incur more candidate attrition. These assessments use strict time limits and have objectively correct/incorrect answers, which yield a more stressful testing experience. In these assessments, candidates are required to avoid distractions, advising them to carve out time specifically for this process. Some candidates will simply refuse to participate, and others may drop out during the assessment, especially if they feel they are doing badly. However, this is offset by the fact that cognitive ability and knowledge-based assessments rank among the most powerful predictors of performance known, more than making up for increased attrition.

Who is most likely to drop out?

In practice, dropout rates vary considerably between organizations, roles, and job levels, with some seeing very little candidate attrition at all. For example, early-career hiring typically sees very little attrition when using pre-employment tests of any kind, and for many reasons. Early-career hires, who are either still in education or have just finished, are comfortable with the idea of testing. Indeed, testing is more natural to them than working is, resulting in very little attrition. Additionally, without relevant work experience, early-career hires are typically very keen to find work and are in competition with a large number of other candidates. Consequently, candidate attrition is likely to be low, and organizations can use pre-employment tests liberally.

More senior hires, however, are likely to be increasingly averse to pre-employment tests, especially ability tests. This is particularly frustrating, as the more cognitively complex the role, the more powerful ability tests are for predicting performance. However, we don’t advise avoiding pre-employment tests for these roles, but instead recommend using them more tactically. For example, you could give the candidate a battery of pre-employment tests immediately after a face-to-face interview, where they simply cannot escape. Although using tests at the shortlist stage is more effective, some testing is better than none, and you must adapt accordingly.

For experienced, but not senior-level roles, organizations should take a balanced approach, aiming to use the assessments as early in the process as they can, but remaining mindful of attrition. In some roles, where applicants are both plentiful and highly motivated, you can use pre-employment tests early on in the process as a shortlisting tool. For other roles, where applicants have considerable power in the recruitment process, you should use pre-employment testing the same way we do for senior hires, and try to minimize friction in the process.

Conclusion and recommendations

As with any additional stages to a recruitment process, some attrition is to be expected, and organizations must consider its impact. However, it's the least committed candidates who are most likely to drop out because of selection process requirements. Additionally, low performers, not high performers, make up the bulk of attrition, particularly when ability tests are part of the process. Consequently, some degree of attrition is unlikely to reduce the quality of hire, and even has the potential to improve it. Nevertheless, particular attention should be paid to candidate experience, but never at the expense of quality of hire.