Message Thread:
Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring?
11/12/17
Does anyone have experience using a mechanical aptitude test to select new entry level hires?
Which tests do you recommend?
As any of us doing this business for long knows, some new hires "get it" and learn quickly and become proficient woodworkers quickly. Others... well, some even with good eager attitudes just don't.
I've read the military has used mechanical aptitude tests for close to a century but I've never heard of any fellow cabinetmakers doing this.
11/12/17 #2: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
My first boss on my first day gave me a 2 page cut list. On 2 carts were random width and lengths of SA mahogany($2k).
He watched me from across the shop, while I stood there at the radial arm saw and talked myself into chopping up this pile.
It was his own test. If I stood there for too long and did nothing or came over and asked too many questions, he figured I didn't have the stuff.
I remember going to apply for a job at a local fibreglass boatbuilders shop. I was about 18. These guys were wicked smart. They handed me a photocopied sheet of 10 math/physics questions and said take it home and have a go. Come back tomorrow and we'll see how you did.
I'm a uni kind of guy. Really good at math and science. I could answer about 6/10 questions. The rest were too hard to understand. I went back and handed it to the interviewer. He said good work. We currently need a sander. If we need somebody smarter we'll give you a call.
11/13/17 #3: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
We listen to the explanation of their experience and then hand them two blocks of wood and ask them to measure them.
The answers are sometimes funny. 4/12's?
This test only can disqualify if they boast experience and can't measure.
We have been very successful building employees. My last few hires have been young short order cooks. None could measure in the beginning and all are good employees.
11/13/17 #4: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
I am actually only interested to know if anyone has used some of the standardized, professional, scientifically prepared Mechanical Aptitude Tests, and how the results were. I've never used them but am very curious to know if they work in the real world of a woodwork factory.
These tests are designed to find aptitude even where experience might be lacking. Why might this be important?
Someone might be totally unfamiliar with woodwork and our machinery, but if they have high Mechanical Aptitude they might be able to be trained and become a better employee long term than someone who comes and and can use the saw and use a tape measure, but whose mechanical aptitude is lower.
I've done some of my own shop tests over the years with mixed results... but I'm especially interested to know about anyone's experience with actual standardized tests.
Thanks!
11/14/17 #5: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
Website: http://www.guildanderson.co.uk
We use SHL online tests, specifically Spatial awareness, inductive (logical) reasoning and numerical reasoning. Also DISC assessments.
The key is that the results don't determine whether someone gets the job or not, as the fit into the company is the most important thing, but it does help you make a more informed decision
SHL Tests
11/16/17 #6: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
Website: http://harmonicdesignworks.com
I've used a couple of one page tests at various times at two different companies. If the work involves reading and basic math, then they are helpful in weeding out people who don't feel comfortable with that. I've never thought about mechanical aptitude tests and am not sure what that entails. I will say that one of my better employees was someone who had never used a tape measure in his life and had to ask me to explain the divisions. It threw me, but he was smart enough that he just laughed and said, "Oh, of course. That's easy." These days, if someone shows up consistently and can work for more than 15 minutes without a phone break I figure they have potential...
11/18/17 #7: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
I have to warn everyone to be careful of Griggs v. Duke Power.
The 1971 Supreme Court decision that essentially outlawed any test that could be possibly be discriminatory in intent or PRACTICE. Practice being the operative word. Tons of employment discrimination case law has resulted.
All of which has so petrified and scared the Fortune 500 that they now use any college degree as their only "test" of basic competence.
A bad joke, but that's what they're reduced to doing. IF ALL OF THOSE GUYS ARE SCARED OF TESTING, YOU SHOULD BE, TOO.
Tests of ANYTHING are generally a can of legal worms that you probably don't want to open.
For instance, handing a couple of blocks of wood to someone and asking them to measure them makes perfect sense to me. Probably to you, too.
But, in the hands of a lawyer, it's some kind of discrimination against the guy who took the test and failed because he's never seen a tape measure before in his life and therefore had no idea whatsoever what all those little markings mean.
And there you go. Discrimination in PRACTICE. It's that easy. Ridiculous, but easy.
That could be very expensive to the employer doing that seemingly harmless test.
I'm not a lawyer, just a business guy, but I implore you not to use ANY test until you've consulted your lawyer or a lawyer who knows something about employment law.
Alternatively, you might get away with any given test for years. Or, then again, the third or tenth or hundredth guy you give it to might sue your butt and business into oblivion.
11/21/17 #8: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
I may well be wrong. But as I understand it, you ARE allowed to discriminate. Otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to require a college degree (IF that is true, which is not my understanding of Burger's majority opinion).
However, you are NOT allowed to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information.
"Discrimination" has somehow become a bad word, but it is essential to everything from deciding which employee to hire to what machine to buy or even what retirement plan to offer. The FIRST definition of Discriminate is:
1.recognize a distinction; differentiate.
The day you can't do that you may as well be dead.
Of course, if your testing tends to eliminate ethnic minorities (the basis of GvDP, as I understand it), you may be well advised to reconsider.
And finally, for most people who visit this forum it's all a moot point since anyone with less than 15 employees is not required to adhere to the EEOC rulings.
11/21/17 #9: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
Still hoping to get feedback from anyone who has actually used a standardized test of mechanical aptitude.
The idea sounds great - identifying people with the brain wiring to do well with mechanical things and solve mechanical problems. The hope is these people can be trained to greater productivity in the shop.
11/23/17 #10: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
"Kekaha man" -- My bottom line was consult a lawyer.
Straw-men like which machines to buy or retirement plans to offer have nothing to do with HIRING and tests used in doing so.
Differentiating is a great concept, but lawyers have turned it into a minefield as regards hiring.
Requiring a college degree is so general it can't possibly be discriminatory in theory OR practice. Fog-a-mirror time. Making it more or less useless.
I totally agree that any business (but never any government) should be able to discriminate on any basis they want.
Any idiot-run business that discriminates based on race or gender or any other ridiculous basis (and I'm sure it still happens) would be driven out of business over time as competitors hire the people they stupidly rejected for no valid business reason.
But that's not the state of the law. The government knows best and we can't waste any time waiting for markets to work, so it all must be legislated and then litigated, ad infinitum.
So, certain differentiations are "better" (or at least allowable) than are others.
Meanwhile, never put it past a lawyer to try to make some edict applicable only to larger employers applicable to everyone. It's what they do.
I say again, don't use any employment test without consulting your lawyer no matter how many employees you may have.
"Scott" -- see above. It all sounds wonderful and very possibly is, until you run across the wrong guy with a lawyer.
11/23/17 #11: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
In keeping with thanksgiving tradition:
Racism has been caused by government infinitely more than small business owners.
Just with a smell test, what small business owner in his right mind is going to do anything but hire the best person for the job?
This has been going on since the 40s. This article explains how this has worked.
Government created racism
11/23/17 #12: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
I used to have prospective employees build a small pyramid. None could do it but it was good test of how far they could get.
Probably not a good idea though because of safety and legal implications.
I have used psychological tests with some success, but they are not cheap. IIRC Alan F has stated that he used them as well.
And they are legal, the companies go to great lengths to make sure they are legal.
11/23/17 #13: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
Thank you for that link, Pat, people could use a little edification about who the racists were 100 years ago.
Wilson was the absolute worst, flat-out racist ever elected, bar none.
I wonder when Princetonians (Wilson was President of Princeton before becoming Governor of New Jersey and then President of the US) will be demanding that every statue or even mention of him on some building on the Princeton campus will be torn down.
And I say that as someone whose father got his PhD in inorganic chemistry from Princeton in the '50s and later told us stories about seeing Albert Einstein on the Princeton campus.
Speaking of testing, I too speak from experience. Back around 1990, I used to have a licensed psychiatrist test all of my prospective new hires.
Amazingly, nobody ever flunked. After about a dozen, I stopped bothering, considering that I had to fire half of the first dozen within 6 months.
At this point I have concluded that the whole testing deal is a racket and I'm glad I never ran across anyone who flunked and also had a good lawyer.
My advice remains just don't do it. I'll add to that don't do it even if a lawyer says it's OK. It ain't worth the risk.
11/23/17 #14: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
I will agree that Wilson was the worst president in the history of the US.
BTW I read somewhere that Churchill said that if the US would have stayed out of WW1 Europe would have come to terms much quicker. (makes me wonder if it also would have kept Germany out of war reparations, thus avoiding WW2)
But the most racist award IMO goes to a sociopath,who makes my blood boil, LBJ.
I have had Some success with testing.
My policy is always hire the upbeat/enthusiastic guys, guys who answers questions quickly and unambiguously, guys who are amiable and affable.
Simple metric and it always works, with the only caveat being that these type of individuals move on quickly because they are always producers. But I can honestly say that I have NEVER regretted hiring such an individual.
One other metric that is telling is the individuals resume. It is more difficult now than it used to be because of lawyers but it is still helpful and prescient to consider them. One trick I used was to call the company after hours which will as often as not get you to the owner who as often as not will be very forthright.
11/24/17 #15: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
Heh. LBJ. Yup. Something about influencing voting preferences for 200 years. Cost us more trillions to date than I care to count.
When it came to references, I always either said our policy is not to comment or "I can't say anything negative about so-and-so." Which was true because I couldn't without possible liability.
At the same time, if I wouldn't say anything positive about so-and-so, that said it all by inference. And I took other owner's comments or lack thereof on their former employees the same way.
After all, it's a rare ex-employee who deserves much in the way of positive commentary. A few do, but most were incompetent or perpetually late or dopers or whatever. Not a single word about which should ever be mentioned.
The threat of lawsuits has reduced what might have been honest conversations about former employees to communicating in a very inexact sort of code that has no liability.
Probably generally not very fair to ex-employees, but smart employers are generally going to protect themselves by saying little or nothing at all. Technically, they don't have to say a single word.
Ex-employees are a small and diffuse group who will never take it up with the lawyers who caused the problem.
11/24/17 #16: Mechanical Aptitude test for hiring ...
I have had better luck than you on the references. If nothing else you can go by their longevity at a job.
LBJ is the most racist of all, the "great society" could be called eugenics by LBJ
|