(Visited 9 times, 1 visits today)
Why Most Job Suitability Assessments Don’t Work — And What Actually Does
When I began building HR processes, I relied on standard personality questionnaires, generalized aptitude tests, and structured interviews. But despite meticulously following best practices, too often the “ideal” candidate didn’t fit or stayed only a few months.
That experience led me to question: just how predictive are most typical job assessments? Most overlook what really matters — job-specific behavioral alignment, enjoyment, and ability to stay engaged long-term.
Generic approach: Many personality tests assess characteristics in isolation, without anchoring them to the real job at hand. That reduces their predictive relevance.
Self-report bias: Candidates often respond in ways they think the employer wants—introducing distortion.
Weak prediction of performance: Strong correlations with job performance exist mostly for cognitive ability tests—not personality alone.
No insight into employee enjoyment: A test that doesn’t measure whether someone actually enjoys their work often fails to predict retention or sustained performance.
In short: traditional tools focus on “fit in theory,” not on long-term success in real conditions.
Built on 20+ years of research, Harrison Assessments addresses these shortcomings by combining eligibility, suitability, paradox balance, and engagement prediction.
Harrison has defined more than 6500 job success formulas tailored to specific roles and experience levels, based on research over 650+ job types.
This means candidates are assessed against the actual requirements of the role, not against generic job descriptors.
The system ranks candidates both by traditional eligibility (skills, education, experience) and behavioral suitability specific to the role. It then merges them into a weighted overall score.
This holistic method ensures behavioral strengths aren’t over‑ or under‑emphasized.
Grounded in Enjoyment‑Performance Theory, Harrison shows that people who enjoy at least 75 % of their job are up to three times more likely to succeed.
By measuring interests, motivators, values, and preferences, it predicts both performance and satisfaction.
Unlike simplistic trait assessments, Harrison identifies derailers—when a strength is pushed too far—and measures how behaviors interact. This emphasis on balance ensures performance sustainability under stress.
The assessment is structured to detect self‑deception or faking, using forced‑choice techniques to improve reliability.
Organizations using Harrison have seen up to 50 % lower turnover, thanks to better job fit and accurate retention predictors.
This aligns with broader research on job embeddedness showing that context‑specific fit predicts intention to remain even beyond satisfaction metrics.
When roles match innate motivators, new hires adapt more quickly—and produce discretionary effort, which in turn drives results.
Harrison also benchmarks top performers across roles, enabling HR to identify high‑potential talent and tailor development aligned with true behavioral drivers.
Because Harrison’s behavior questions are job‑focused and directly linked to documented job requirements, it adheres to employment laws like those stemming from Griggs v. Duke Power Co. in the U.S.—avoiding legal risk tied to using generic personality tests.
Job template design
Role-specific behavioral & eligibility criteria
Ensures relevance and clarity in selection
Assessment
30-minute online forced‑choice questionnaire measuring 175 traits
High reliability; detects exaggeration/faking
Scoring
Eligibility + suitability + paradox balance
Holistic and nuanced decision basis
Engagement forecast
Measures enjoyment and motivational alignment
Predicts retention & discretionary performance
Interview guides
Structured prompts based on gaps and strengths
Enables focused, legally defensible interview process
Development pathways
Coaching insights on strengths, derailers, motivators
Supports individual growth and internal mobility
Even highly respected instruments like MBTI, Holland/RIASEC, or other broad interest inventories suffer from limited validity/reliability when used in hiring, especially without scientific validation specific to the job.
Meta‑analyses show that personality tests alone account for far less predictive variance than cognitive or job‑specific trait tools.
Employers relying on generic or outdated tools frequently experience:
Higher turnover (employees leave when work doesn’t align with what they value)
Slower ramp-up time
Lower engagement and discretionary effort
Legal exposure if assessments lack job‑relatedness
The real hiring future lies not in ticking off skills or personality types — but in aligning people with their roles at a behavioral and motivational level.
Harrison Assessments is not gimmicky—it’s a scientifically validated platform that integrates:
Rigorous job‑specific behavioral models
Enjoyment engaged performance
Paradoxical trait balance
Eligibility and reliability measures
Predictive retention and tailored development paths
When organizations adopt this job‑centric, data‑driven approach, they reduce mis-hires, build stronger teams, and support people in doing work they genuinely enjoy—leading to sustained performance and engagement.
© 2025 ArkhaDome Consulting – content inspired by Harrison Assessments research and international HR best practices.