Ask the expert: Testing times for people taking part in interviews

Q. I was interviewed for a technical manager job recently. The company explained that there would be an interview and then a test. I went in at the appointed time and it was an intense two-hour interview, followed by about three hours of paper and pencil tests.

By about halfway through the test, I was exhausted and pretty irritated. I quit paying much attention to what I did on the tests, and decided that even if they offered me the job (which they did) that I wouldn't accept it (and I didn't).

Why do employers think they can just put you through the wringer like that? They wouldn't even tell me how I did on the tests that they administered.

A. The three most valid ways of gathering information to select someone are: tests that measure required skills and characteristics; structured interviews which assess past experience; and work samples that demonstrate mastery of job requirements.

None of these is perfect, so a combination of two or more is generally best. A thorough employer will try to gather information from multiple sources to try to select the best possible person for the job. From your question, the types of information gathered might be appropriate but it sounds as if you thought it was "over the top" in terms of difficulty and the amount of testing, particularly since the interviewing was a form of testing, as well.

Most applicants expect a reasonable amount of scrutiny and want to be assessed on their ability, but may be irritated - as you were - if there seems to be more than is appropriate for the level of the job, or if they weren't told what to expect.

Basically, research suggests that most applicants want assessment that treats them fairly by focusing on their fitness for the job, and not their personal characteristics. In this case, I'd say we could add that allows you to perform well, and is signalled in advance in terms of the amount of time required.

Employers need to maintain an awareness of how applicants may perceive the recruitment and selection process, and fine-tune their procedures and communication.

You may want to provide some feedback to the organisation; would it have helped if you knew the interview and tests were so lengthy? Would two appointments have been better? Perhaps you can help them to improve their practice.

You might also ask, formally, for feedback on the tests that you were administered, so that you can identify any weaknesses in your own profile for further career development.