Integrity testing

An overt integrity test for reducing Counterproductive work behavior

What is integrity?

In its simplest definition, integrity is the ability to tell the truth. Its meaning is not to justify a situation or reverse its meaning to justify the individual's behavior. The meaning of the word is to face and tell the whole truth, regardless of the extent to which this truth is good or bad for the person who says it. Integrity, honesty, and reliability are all synonyms for adhering to the principles and values of morality and ethics.

Reliability is one of the most essential variables in the workplace and appears in almost every job analysis or examination of core organizational values. It is defined as adhering to a code of moral values and following the organization's rules, norms, and policies (Fine, 2013).

Why isn't everyone honest?

Honest people are more rational, honest, independent, and fair than others who are not honest because they understand that this will serve them in the long run - contributing to positive self-esteem, survival, and well-being.

1.Credibility requires rational thinking, and only some are rational. It also requires preference for long-term goals over short-term ones, choosing appropriate means, and using all the knowledge one has to act directly.
2.Even rational people may act dishonestly if they give in to the whims of the moment or prefer to stick to the status quo instead of their values.
3.People succumb to social pressures which do not fit the rational values of the individual. (Becker, 1998).

What are Counterproductive work behaviors?

Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB) refer to a wide range of deviant behaviors that are illegal and immoral, including serious offenses such as theft, fraud, and drug use by employees. Many studies report the cost and prevalence of CWB to the extent that these behaviors can affect the organization's survival. In addition to the enormous costs and damages associated with CWB, these behaviors are very common. According to some estimates, between 33% and 75% of employees will engage in these behaviors, which may be responsible for approximately 30% or more of any business failure.

In order to reduce the scope of harm, for several decades, organizations have shown a growing interest in screening job candidates who may exhibit counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). This is what the integrity tests were created for. Indeed, integrity tests have been shown to be able to predict CWB in a wide variety of different environments (Woolley and Hakstain, 1993).

Integrity tests are tests designed to evaluate the reliability and honesty of employees and job candidates, as well as their tendency to perform counterproductive actions in the organization (Ones and Viswesvaran, 1998). These are self-report paper and pencil tests (it doesn't matter if they were transferred to a computerized format. The basis is the same and different from polygraphs, interviews, and background checks) intended for use among a standard population that is not criminal or psychopathological.

Guion, in 1965, distinguished between two types of reliability tests: overt and covert. Accordingly, Sackett (1989) distinguished between two types of reliability tests: overt tests (also called "overt") and personality-based tests. These tests presented good levels of predictive validity for a variety of criteria. The validity was tested in an extensive meta-analysis by Ones (1993). The tests were found to measure the three big traits: conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability (presented in order of importance). Personality-based questionnaires can predict CWB, or at least some of the dimensions of CWB, at a sound level. Still, in most studies, lower predictive validity was found in these tests over overt reliability tests.

Overt reliability tests are more strongly related to CWB than personality-based reliability tests. The overt tests were originally developed to examine attitudes toward theft and predict future thefts. They were also referred to as tests examining "deviance in the field of property". These tests, also called "transparent" or "with a visible purpose", directly investigate the attitudes and perceptions towards behaviors that deviate from the desired norm (Woolley and Hakstain, 1993).

In conclusion, it can be observed that issuing an integrity test to potential candidates is a necessary action that any organization that wants to succeed should adopt for itself, both to avoid CWB behaviors that harm the organization's productivity and to prevent financial damages to the organization.

By: Sophie Strolovic

Becker, T. E. (1998). Integrity inorganizations: Beyond honesty and conscientiousness. Academy of ManagementReview,23(1), 154-161

Fine, S. (2013). A look atcross-cultural integrity testing in three banks.Personnel Review, 42(3),266-280

Marcus, B., Ashton, M. C., and Lee,K. (2013). A note on the incremental validity of integrity tests beyondstandard personality inventories for the criterion of counterproductivebehaviour. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne desSciences de l'Administration, 30(1), 18-25

Ones, D. S., and Viswesvaran, C.(1998). Gender, age, and race differences on overt integrity tests: Resultsacross four large-scale job applicant datasets.Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1),35

Wanek, J. E. (1999). Integrity andhonesty testing: What do we know? How do we use it?. International Journal ofselection and assessment, 7(4), 183-195

Ones, D. S., and Viswesvaran, C. (1998). Gender,age, and race differences on overt integrity tests: Results across fourlarge-scale job applicant datasets.Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 35