Integrity testing

Overt Integrity Testing as a Reducer of Counterproductive Work Behavior

What is integrity?

In its simple definition, integrity is the ability to tell the truth. Its meaning is not to justify a situation or reverse its meaning in order to justify an individual's behavior. The meaning of the word is to cope with and tell the whole truth, regardless of how good or bad this truth is for the person saying it. Integrity, honesty and reliability - all these are synonymous words for adherence to principles and values of morality and ethics.

Integrity is one of the most important variables in the workplace and appears in almost every job analysis or examination of organizational core values. It is defined as adherence to a code of moral values, and compliance with the organization's laws, norms and policies (Fine, 2013).

Why aren't all people 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 term – it will contribute to positive self-esteem, survival and well-being.

1. Integrity requires rational thinking, and not everyone is rational. It also requires prioritizing long-term goals over short-term ones, choosing appropriate means and using all the knowledge an individual has in order to act directly.
2. Even rational people may act dishonestly if they succumb to momentary whims or prefer to stick to the status quo instead of their values.
3. People succumb to social pressures that do not match the individual's rational values.

(Becker, 1998).

What are counterproductive work behaviors?

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 on the cost and spread of CWB to the extent that these behaviors can affect the survival of the organization itself. 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 participate in these behaviors, and these behaviors may be responsible for about 30% or more of all business failures.

In order to reduce the extent of damage, for several decades, organizations have shown increasing interest in screening job candidates who may exhibit problematic work behaviors (CWB).  For this purpose, integrity tests (integrity) were designed. Indeed, integrity tests have been proven to be able to predict CWB in a wide range of different environments (Woolley &Hakstain, 1993). 

Integrity tests are tests designed to assess the integrity and honesty of employees and job candidates as well as their tendency to perform anti-productive actions in the organization (Ones & Viswesvaran, 1998). These are paper and pencil self-report tests (it doesn't matter if they have been transferred to computerized format. The basis is the same and distinguished from polygraph, interviews and background checks) designed for use among a normal population that is not criminal or psychopathological.

Guion, in 1965, distinguished between two types of integrity tests: overt and covert. Accordingly, (Sackett (1989 distinguished between two types of integrity tests: overt tests (also called "overt") and personality-based tests. These tests showed good levels of predictive validity for a variety of criteria. Construct validity was examined in an extensive meta-analysis by Ones (1993) and it was found that the tests measure the three major traits: conscientiousness, agreeableness and emotional stability (the traits are presented in order of importance). Personality-based questionnaires can predict CWB, or at least part of the dimensions of CWB at a good level, but in most studies lower predictive validity was found in these tests than in overt integrity tests.

Overt integrity tests are more strongly linked to CWB than personality-based integrity tests. The overt tests were originally developed to examine attitudes toward theft and predict future thefts, and were also called tests examining "property deviation". These tests, also called "transparent" or "overt purpose" directly investigate attitudes and perceptions toward behaviors that deviate from the desired norm (Woolley & Hakstain, 1993).

In conclusion, it can be seen that administering an integrity test to potential candidates is a basic action that any organization that wants to succeed should adopt, both to avoid CWB behaviors that harm the organization's productivity and to prevent financial damage to the organization.

Bibliography:

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., & 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., & 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., & 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

Authored by Sophie Strolovich, Social Worker