By Yossi Pinkas, TakeCareWe have been discussing the benefits of using a nanny personality and risk assessments in helping parents hire in-home childcare providers. But, while administering nanny personality assessments can significantly improve the selection of a nanny by parents, it may also create certain challenges.
Some parents are concerned that the use of such a test may offend an applicant and create a bad impression. While this may be true and certain applicants may even refuse to take such tests, parents should always keep in mind that such tests are a standard procedure for applicants in many business and government organizations, as well as part of the screening process in a number of nanny and au pair agencies.
There is really no good reason why parents recruiting a nanny on their own, will not benefit from the use of such assessments. There is no other position as important and as critical as that of a child caregiver. Parents shouldn’t compromise on the screening process and use all possible means to make the best-informed decision.
Some parents are concerned that the use of such a test may offend an applicant and create a bad impression. While this may be true and certain applicants may even refuse to take such tests, parents should always keep in mind that such tests are a standard procedure for applicants in many business and government organizations, as well as part of the screening process in a number of nanny and au pair agencies.
There is really no good reason why parents recruiting a nanny on their own, will not benefit from the use of such assessments. There is no other position as important and as critical as that of a child caregiver. Parents shouldn’t compromise on the screening process and use all possible means to make the best-informed decision.
To minimize objections, parents should explain to the nanny about the test, why they feel it is important, and ask her to put herself in their place, facing a similar decision about her own kids.
Another challenge is for parents to avoid using the test results as a single decision factor. Parents should keep in mind that nanny personality and risk assessments do not replace interviews or any other component of the existing caregiver screening process. As any other psychological tool, they are not 100% accurate and should be considered a decision supporting tool and not a decision making tool. When hiring a nanny, parents should always interview applicants, check references, and use their intuition, which is as important and useful as any scientific tool.
Nanny personality and risk assessments should be used correctly to ensure test results are valid. The applicant must read fluently the language in which the test is administered. Applicants who are not fluent in the test language should not be tested.
Tests are also designed for a specific purpose. For example, a test designed to assess applicants for a job should not be used for self-test purposes, such as by someone who wishes to check if he is suitable for a certain position or occupation.
Designed and used correctly, nanny personality and risk assessments are invaluable for parents who are looking for a nanny for their child, and should become a standard component of the screening process of any childcare provider.
To find out more about nanny personality assessment tests visit TakeCare.
Another challenge is for parents to avoid using the test results as a single decision factor. Parents should keep in mind that nanny personality and risk assessments do not replace interviews or any other component of the existing caregiver screening process. As any other psychological tool, they are not 100% accurate and should be considered a decision supporting tool and not a decision making tool. When hiring a nanny, parents should always interview applicants, check references, and use their intuition, which is as important and useful as any scientific tool.
Nanny personality and risk assessments should be used correctly to ensure test results are valid. The applicant must read fluently the language in which the test is administered. Applicants who are not fluent in the test language should not be tested.
Tests are also designed for a specific purpose. For example, a test designed to assess applicants for a job should not be used for self-test purposes, such as by someone who wishes to check if he is suitable for a certain position or occupation.
Designed and used correctly, nanny personality and risk assessments are invaluable for parents who are looking for a nanny for their child, and should become a standard component of the screening process of any childcare provider.
To find out more about nanny personality assessment tests visit TakeCare.
For nannies that are apprehensive about taking personality assessments, would you not take a personality assessment even if a potential nanny employer or nanny placement agency asked you to during a job interview?
48 comments:
As I have been thinking and discussing this over the past few days I would take it.
I have been asked very personal questions in nanny agency applications, the same questions Pat Cascio listed as questions in a personality test on this newsletter facebook page.
I have been duped into paying for background check by agency (now know it's not right to charge the nanny but the parents pay for it) so I can't see myself not taking a personality test if asked.
Parents are smart enough to know if you were spanked as a child doesn't mean you will hit their child. But it's also true when people get stressed out they do what they know. It is a red flag.
I have posted a lot of concerns but if asked I would take it rather than turn it down. I am seeing too many friends not find good jobs right now. I still think it's weird but I would take the test if it meant getting a good job.
I do not have a problem with this questions being asked of live (although I do wonder about the legality of some).
I know I couldn't give the right answer on some questions that will demonstrate I am the "perfect candidate", in their eyes. I don't care for a judgement that will be based on dishonesty. And, or my personal history. I can't change that I was spanked as a child, that I fought with friends and siblings. It was not my choice to grow up in the country in Wisconsin where sooner or later everyone speeds. It's my heritage, it's being human.
Bosses get that.
But that doesn't translate to some numbers on test results based on yes and no answers from some computer generated test.
Agencies and employers don't want to deal with liars. This notion that they don't know how to interview and ask the hard questions is something that seems absurd. Obviously we know agents ask the tough questions of nannies daily. AND, nanny employers are often going to be in jobs where they are middle to uppper management and have other employees working under them. These are Drs, Lawyers, CEOs, Professors, etc. They aren't rookies on how to conduct interviews. And bottom line, when it does come to hiring a stranger to come into your private home and care for your children, you are going to get over any qualms you have about asking delicate questions quickly.
I don't mind be grilled, in fact I prefer it to the vague parent. Or, if an agency or parents were to hand me these questions on some form to complete essay style, I would do it in a heartbeat no matter how long it took me to complete.
Stephanie,
Thanks for running this series though I do believe you have given all of us a lot to think about and consider, carefully. Wiser nannies are better nannies.
Yes, there are a lot of issues to consider and valid reasons to not want to take this type of test. I think personality tests should never REPLACE other typical means of hiring a nanny like the background check. I think we nannies are so scrutinized already that personality tests aren't any more invasive. We are already asked to take drug tests, background checks, call references, and really personal questions asked in interviews and on agency applications that this type of test does not scare me. I would take it.
I have taken some and got really weird results. I don't want an agency staff person or parent without giving these types of test to administer it to me. If it was something more professional and "tried and true" like the Myers Briggs or even the MMPI and the results were being interpreted by someone qualified to do so, I'd have no issue with it.
You could respectfully decline to take the test. You could ask the many questions you have concerning how the test was developed, what it purportedly measures, who will be interpreting the results, who will see the them and how they will be used. You could even ask the employer why they are using a personality assessment for hiring purposes in the first place.
But what you could do in theory and what you should do in reality are two very different things. When there is competition for a job the person who is willing to do whatever it takes to help the parent/employer feel comfortable with you (the job seeker) is the one who will get the job.
Of course if you ask reasonable questions about the test and the parent, agency staff, or employer gets annoyed with you than they just may not be a good match for you. They shouldn't get annoyed by a few questions about a test! Then you can ask yourself if you really want to work somewhere that is going to be upset with you if you ask questions about their test.
So, figuring out before interviews what you are willing to do and not do and your response is best advice. Know ahead of time if you are willing to allow a future employer to do a credit check, use a nanny cam or administer a personality test. No right or wrong answer actually, just what you feel comfortable doing and always respond respectfully.
Keep in mind that the personality testing industry is almost entirely unregulated.
Anyone can market a personality test. Many of these tests are not scientific in the least.
It's even illegal for anyone but a licensed psychologist to administer the test! I won't trust a nanny agency staff person or random parent as qualified to do that!
I just don’t see how this degree of interrogation would not be perceived as trying to learn the kind of information that could be used to identify and discriminate against certain kinds of people.
Career Nanny Melissa
Madison WI
Having a PhD in Clinical Psychology, I find it very disturbing to read certain comments on this blog.
Using terms such as Myers Briggs or MMPI without understanding what they are does not contribute to the level of this interesting discussion.
Myers Briggs assessments are used to identify psychological types and measure psychological preferences. As such they can be applied for career counseling or personal and professional development coaching, but they should never be used as a pre-employment screening tool.
MMPI is a clinical tool for determining psychiatric problems and should be used by certified clinical psychologists only, to help diagnose mental pathologies. Again, this tool should never be used as an employment screening tool.
Pre-employment testing is only as good as the test maker, the test interpreter, and complete background information. Test results are no substitute for doing the legwork of a complete reference and background check. The idea of parents using these tests who are not trained to interpret the responses is dangerous and should be forbidden.
Dear CT Nanny
Please make up your mind.
Either the personality testing industry is almost entirely unregulated or it's so regulated that it is illegal for anyone but a licensed psychologist to administer the test.
And BTW, Licensed Psychologists are typically clinical psychologists. To my best knowledge, those dealing with vocational psychology or psychometrics do not require a license.
I think CT Nanny has tapped into valid arena though.
The nanny industry in this country is not licensed/regulated or whatever verbage seems to fit.
There are so many laws related to the internet that have not been created yet.
So can someone claim to have a "nanny" assessment test be authentic? Um how?
I once worked for a doctor who had their license suspended because of a drug addiction. So I have some trust issues when it comes to revealing my mental or physical issues in general. I am surely not going to hand them over to some psychologist I have never met or personally verified through the medical community licensing boards to make sure they are real. And if I can't get that, I'm not taking a test from them, they could be a quack or a con artist.
GOTTA LOVE INVESTIGATIVE NANNY JOURNALISM/BLOGS !!! :)
I would take the test if asked. But I think comments are correct about being careful about what is asked. I've read here before that nannies have worked while on pain narcotic medication prescribed by a doctor, yet someone else might be an addict, which of those people should tell the parents about their medical history? Many gray areas. Good topic.
I'd take the test since I am an open book.
So far I am not a fan of this idea. If parents were willing to take one as well then I would too.
My name is Yossi Pinkas and I am the CEO and founder of TakeCare.
I would like to thank Stephanie for posting my articles and initiating this discussion and thank you all for your comments. I have learned a lot from those comments and appreciate them. I agree that some of you concerns are valid but one has to weigh the benefits to kids against the shortcomings and challenges of applying those tests.
I personally have a lot of respect for nannies and the job they are doing. I have three kids and for the last 14 years I've been employing several nannies and Au pairs. Most nannies (including all of those I've worked with) do a great job and god knows its not an easy one. It is definitely the most important job one can do (I hope I'm not offending president Obama with this statement, the last thing I need is a negative comment from him as well).
For those of you concerned with the quality of the tests, NannyTest has been developed by a highly reputable test provider, Psiphas Psychological applications (www.psiphas.com). Psiphas provides such tests to the largest placement agencies as well as to major commercial and government organizations in Israel, Brazil and additional countries for more than 18 years. Its customers include IKEA and FedEx as well as the Israeli Defense Forces, the Israeli Prison service, the Bank of Israel and many others.
The test reports are designed in a manner which does not require any interpretation by the parents. The scoring and interpretation is done automatically, as is the case in most computerized assessments. All parents have to do is to decide whether they are satisfied with the applicant qualities as reported and whether they need to re-check certain issues with the applicant in case those were highlighted in the test report.
Regarding confidentiality, parents agree to certain terms and conditions before receiving an access to the system, and confidentiality is one of those. This agreement is legally binding. I am not sure that parents can be trusted less than placement agencies in keeping the test results to themselves. Nevertheless, to protect the privacy of the applicant, the test report has been modified and unlike the report provided to organizations, the NannyTest report does not disclose the actual responses to specific questions, only the overall score per topic.
As to both parents and nannies doing some sort of personality assessments, this is an interesting idea but it requires a completely different type of tests to assess the match between parents and nannies. With all due respect, TakeCare concern isn't the the nannies, nor the parents, but the safety and well being of the kids, and those concerns are what NannyTest is designed to address.
I will be happy to personally answer any question you may have or listen to whatever feedback or advice you wish to provide. I will be following all comments on this blog but you can also feel free to write to me directly (yossi [at] take-care [dot] me) and I promise a prompt response.
Thanks again,
Yossi
Thanks for explaining Yossi. I think you may have won over some nannies and parents today!
NO, he still hasn't won over people. This is clearly a buyer beware situation.
It's a foreign company (I did go their site) and what do they know about American mindsets? Both parents and caregivers? Plus I've googled them. Limited information.
Plus I've googled the phrase "nanny personality assessment" for someone who claims it being used by agancies all the time, I'd like to know who because I'm having a hard time finding them.
Thus, can they be tracked by our Better Business Bureaus?
And to imply that 46,000 children in our country have been abused by babysitters, nannies, and caregivers is a falsehood they claim on their website. If there were that many cases in the USA, our politicians would be told by parents all over the country to do something about it. Including licensing the nanny industry.
Thank you, Fiona. I am happy to hear that.
I was not sure but I think it's not a big deal to take the test because I tried the trial and it is geared toward childcare and not the parent / nanny relationship. I've seen this type of anger from nannies towards other topics too and I think so much emotion isn't really necessary. If a nanny doesn't want to take a personality test then they just don't have to and they can still be respectful and kind while stating they aren't comfortable taking the test. Meanwhile they are increasing the chances they won't get the job. But I don't think all the extremely emotional comments are really necessary I really don't think it's illegal or unethical. It's fine to ask questions but being angry isn't really necessary. Take the trial. Still don't like it you simply know you won't take it if asked to in the future. Personally I am still a little confused but if offered the test I would take it.
It is not being angry or emotional to point out that something could potentially be a scam.
There are scam agencies out there who want to charge nannies placement fees, background checks, etc. No that doesn't need to happen, that's the parents job. There are scammers out there contacting nannies all the time. There was a nanny murdered in MN a few years ago because of responding to an online ad and not taking precautions.
There in nothing disrespectful or unkind in pointing out about a company stating lies (as facts) on it's website, why would you trust a company that would do that?
There is nothing that proves chances of not getting a jog will be increased because a nanny refuses to take this assessment. That's a marketing ploy. Or an implication a nanny has something to hide if she doesn't. And because nannies aren't finding jobs in a bad economy they are buying into it.
Some of us having taken the entire test and it was flawed what's to say the program won't go haywire again.
Why should parents accept at face value that nannies are going to be honest when taking this exam?
To just nod our heads yes to these articles and not really probe the realities is silly. And, for those nannies out there, and I have a feeling it's a silent majority, they are now being provided with reasons to steer clear of shady practices.
I don't feel guilty for calling them unethical or possibly illegal ... nannies want to be nice sometimes and think oh they are doing us a great service. No, I have been around this business for more than 25 years now. Not every business out there in our industry is nice and good.
Some national child abuse statistics, from the Arizona Child Abuse info center website:
In 2008, out of over 3.3 million reports of child abuse and neglect, only 772,000 children were substantiated as victims.
(http://childhelpinfocenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=50)
Child daycare providers were involved in 12% of the neglect cases, 9% of the physical abuse cases and 10% of the sexual abuse cases.
(see graphs on http://childhelpinfocenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=94&Itemid=142#relation)
Using 10% as an average figure from the graphs for all cases, this translates to more than 77,200 cases involving child daycare providers in 2008.
Based on the above, the figure of 46,000 cases seems reasonable, and we all should be concerned with the fact that the 2008 are much higher.
Any measure that parents can take to prevent their kids from abuse is a blessing.
What that figure is not breaking down is the number on relative caregivers vs other childcare providers. Nor is it discussing how many of those cases are taking place in licensed facilities. Nor is it separating the different types of neglect. Government entities would really be cracking down on the childcare industry in our country if these things were happening with legitimate childcare providers. This is why you will see advice and recommendations on approved childcare centers, licensing, etc.
When I stated the sentence from the website to some national agencies it was disputed. They said in our nation we always hear about it, like any bad nanny or babysitter story or some non family member abuse caregiver, the media is all over it. I can name off cases right and left off the top of my head. But the number is nowhere 4,600 let alone 10X that amount.
This is the way our nation operates regarding us, think about how often some bad nanny makes the news in some part of the country and immediately some nanny or agency is posting a link about it on a national discussion board. Or a parent one. So that we all know about it. Plus we have the I Saw Your Nanny Blog, and even that isn't seeing hundreds or reports or sightings. A lot parents and people in general really are vigilant when it comes to the safety of kids in our country. We have watchdog types all over the place.
Let's not knock ourselves short for that.
While nannies aren't always great, a huge majority know not to be abusive or they will be canned immediately. No nanny wants to be fired in this economy. This tool isn't being marketed for daycare providers, it's being marketed for parents with nannies and therefore our stats are what should matter not everybody else's.
Yes measures should be taken to protect children from abuse always! But an online yes or no test format is not a wise tool for it. An abuser is going to lie to get the job, that is the bottom line. To really prevent abuse, don't create a method that is inadequate in really screening the good from the bad, the truth tellers and liars, and let parents have a false sense of security about it all.
I am not disputing the questions. The stakes in completely screening a nanny applicant is much higher than a way a typical business would assess employees. These questions should be asked verbally or the nanny has to write them out on some form. These questions should be asked live, face to face, and that way a parent can get or the nanny can provide immediate clarification.
AND, any nanny not comfortable doing that, should be the one you worry about.
_______________________
There are lists of interview questions all over the place that parents can find to ask nannies.
MY suggestion after all of this. We create with the assistance of nannies, agents, nanny lawyers, the nanny doctor a master list of personality assessment questions.
I think Yossi's credentials sound credible now and his points are convincing. I am not afraid to take the test and wouldn't avoid it if asked to take one. But others don't have to take it if they don't want to. Nannies wishing not to take the assessment should just be respectful and courteous when and if they decline.
Michelle and others,
I've been resenting implications from you and others through all of this discussion the past few days that I and others aren't being respectful and courteous for declining it because we have serious legitimate reasons to doubt it. That we are angry, etc. Or not being nice because we are pointing out cons to it. Or maybe we have issues with it because of results we have gotten... whatever.
The world is made up of different types of people, so is our industry, and if we were all polite and passive all the time we wouldn't have forward progress.
Do you think all the parents in NY would consider nannies respectful and courteous now that there is the new law there? Do you honestly think nannies aren't going to have to still be assertive to make parents abide by the law? That they may have to have thick skin one some parents tell them they are being selfish or greedy for just wanting far work conditions.
There are times to speak out, and nannies need to do more of it! Not have other nannies come along and put them down for the ways they make statements.
I am extremely diplomatic in face to face conversation. I am polite, and respectful. Who are you Michelle, to imply that I and others wouldn't be? I'm also well informed so that when I do say no, I can to something I can offer up real facts to go with my reasons.
What I hope I have provided for nannies who want to say no to this assessment as well is the material and resources to do the same.
And Michelle it seems you are putting me down for that.
I am glad to see the owner described the challenges. Good conversation all around. I would probably take the test if it were a family I wanted to work for.
Nope, I was misunderstood. Sometimes we are misunderstood in written word.
I think that nannies have every right to decline. After reading what Yossi said I just thinl I would take the test if asked to.
I also like the advice of another nanny that says to decline courteously is all.
Wasn't criticizing anyone else (intentionally). Best Regards!
WELL... There's only one flamer on this blog that I have read.
It's Yossi's product to sell and he didn't flame at all.
If I want to take the test I will. If I don't, I won't. Period. Good advice given by all no need for any further PERSONAL defending or attacking...
WELL... There's only one flamer on this blog that I have read.
It's Yossi's product to sell and he didn't flame at all.
If I want to take the test I will. If I don't, I won't. Period. Good advice given by all no need for any further PERSONAL defending or attacking...
I find it ironic that some of you preaching about it's merits say you would take the test. But you haven't yet!!! You don't know if your honest genuine answers will be held you against you are not.
I HAVE TAKEN IT, so I can speak with more knowledge about it. And so have others, we answered truthfully and fairly and penalized for it! Little things that become deciding factors on our abilities, our character, our attitudes, our coping mechanisms.
I also know for a fact that the others who took this test with me have great reputations in this industry too.
What happens when any of you take the test, answer truthfully, and may end up with similiar results? Are you going to still support it?
You call me a flamer Eva and then say no reason for personal defending or attacking.
WELL YES. I'm defending reputations from a nanny assesment company that provided unfavorable results against a majority of us who took it.
Do you ever pay attention to consumer reports and reviews? Including those of agencies in our industry. Or nanny job boards.
It's called presenting an argument against something and sometimes nannies do want support and help in doing something they aren't comfortable doing alone.
If people like me weren't here presenting the other side or rest of the story, then what happens, everyone has to go along with it because no one spoke up.
He says he's doing this for children. Well gee aren't we all.
In fact I have been on the side of speaking out about nannies being mandatory reporters of abuse. I have taken course work on it. I have had to do it too. I am last person who wants to see a child abused. Or neglected.
Before you call me a flamer again, I challenge you, take the test, and answer truthfully, honestly, and not to "the right score" but who you are and your history then we'll compare notes.
In fact the big regret here is that it wasn't provided as a complete free trial to nannies here. Because how would people's comments have changed if they knew their own results ahead of time.
How can you endorse a job creating or BREAKING product you haven't tried?
I would like to comment about the issue of the faulty tests that Lisa mentions, and I apologize to Lisa for repeating myself, as she has already read it before on other forums and mentioned my response in a previous post on this blog.
For the first week after launching TakeCare, in a site-testing period in which the assessments were provided for free, there were indeed errors in the reports.
We haven't tried to hide this fact and I admitted it in my response to a number of comments on several posts. We have also notified each and every one of those who used the test properly (i.e. not for testing themselves) and asked them to disregard the results.
Since we monitor the test results on an going basis, comparing the results to the norms, we have identified the problem and corrected it within a few days.
The cause of the problem was a software glitch, and those things happen in new software systems.
The problem was not in the test itself but related to certain internet links that were not modified correctly when moving from a laboratory environment to a released version.
Lisa, and others who have done the tests during the first week, have indeed received erroneous scores. Nevertheless, their scores would have been wrong even without the software glitch since, despite very clear instructions on the site, they have used it for self-testing.
All tests are designed for a specific propose and self tests are structured and scored differently than tests used to screen applicants for a job.
NannyTest is not meant to be used for self-tests.
Thanks everyone, including Lisa and Yossi for contributing to the discussion!
Yossi, could you explain this a little more clearly?
I'm confused. If I take a test about myself, my behaviours, and my past experiences then truthful answers are truthful answers and, thus, those answers are not going to change whether I'm taking the test of my own volition or taking it because I've been asked to do so by a potential employer.
So how does the impetus for taking the test alter the results so dramatically that you can say self testing comes out with completely innacurate results and forced testing does not? If the answers are honest and true then the results should come out just as accurately either way.
What am I missing on that?
Also, one of the anonymous comments above was cut and pasted, it appears, word for word from a comment I made on facebook. I'm kind of curious as to who did that. Rest assured, folks, if I actually post my thoughts on a blog...I put my name on it. So if you see my words with "anonymous", know that it wasn't me who posted it.
Yossi,
You invited us to go take these tests. How were they not supposed to be self tests in situation like that? How exactly is this not a self test anyway?
The nanny logs on and takes it. There is no discussion about proctors. It is a somewhat self administered yes or no type of test. It's a software program that a nanny sits in front of a computer and answers questions. What is an agent or parent supposed to hover over them as they go through each question? This then address right to privacy and confidentiality issues.
Personality and psychology is not an exact science with right and wrong answers. It's not a history class or an English class. Where you can say things happen at specific dates or verbs need to be conjugated in certain ways.
This test didn't allow opportunities for clarification or elaboration. Unlike a face to face interview asking these questions would be. Which, I don't have problems with answering questions. None what so ever.
THIS IS WHY I WILL NOT take this test again. I don't care if glitches may have been there before, glitches happen all the time with computers. Don't tell me about programming, I know enough of that on my own. I'm not going to risk having a poor test score on file about me at some agency.
I'd rather take Myers Brigg or any other assessments out there. My background checks can speak for my reputation.
If asked about assessments, I will encourage parents to have a conversation with me about anything and everything. I have to work for them, care for their children, know them and they need to know me. If we can't talk about things in an interview it does not bode well at all for a good employer and nanny relationship.
Getting an approval score that a 5 or 6 out 10 in an overall rating system. Percentage wise that means 50 or 60. That's not a passing grade in reality. Parents will want to go for that person who hits the 9 or 10 range.
I have been asked behavorial interview questions, personality questions in conversations. They aren't that hard. If parents can't take the time to discuss it because they are too busy... I dont' work them because it means they won't take the time to talk about other things that come up in a job.
There are links after links on the web on how to cheat or pass these assessments. Companies are catching on to this and finding the online assessments really can't be depended on.
I don't believe in lying to get a job or going in with the mindset of thinking that something is the answer parents will want to hear. NO, some parents don't deserve that, because they will take advantage of it. Then the nanny gets burned in the end.
Tara,
That's a good question and rather difficult for me to answer without disclosing certain test mechanisms I prefer not to disclose.
Before I answer, I have a confession to make: I'm not a saint and hopefully not too stupid so I personally don't always tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Going back to your question and assuming most people are not saints nor stupid, I would like to remind you of my explanation of using norms to score the responses.
It is a known phenomena that people respond somewhat differently when their purpose is to get the job rather than to learn about themselves.
Since the norms used in the NannyTest to score the responses are calculated based on a population of job applicants, having someone who is testing himself scored according to such norms will result in erroneous results.
I hope this explanation is sufficient.
Thanks,
Yossi
People are desperate to get jobs, they will do or say things they may not normally do for the sake of getting the job. Including dishonest things. Given that you are going to see nanny candidates you aren't going see the true norm. SO therefore they compromise the reality of the population.
An SAT, ACT, or any college entrance test is knowledge based, hence the difference. Again facts can be graded, disputed, etc.
Live personality assessments, no problem. I think the nanny should have the option to do this. And I do think agents can allow nannies to explain answers so that they can be honest and offer full disclosure.
Vewry interesting topic. I saw on Facebook that some nannies have agencies using the test. Anyone willing to admit which agencies are using it? I see Connecticut Nannies and a Seattle or WA state based agency?
I would love the agency's input.
Although I do understand the concerns of having a trained individual to interpret the results I am not sure it would be necessary with this particular test. I would love the agencies input.
Imani O NY Nanny
What bothers me is that I don't see why we actually need a personality test to evaluate these things: Drug abuse, Drinking habits, Bribery risk, and Gambling habits.
If you hire an experienced nanny with references and background checks it seems a waste a time.
I have written an article that discusses the shortcomings of the current nanny screening process
Please see:
http://www.take-care.me/contents/page.asp?contentPageID=61
Thanks,
Yossi
I think it's a good way to screen caregivers. It's just another tool to help weed out the the bad apples from the good.
I am a parent and used a really great agency and don't see the need for personality assessments on nannies. We have used them at work for a huge corporation for self assessment purposes only. I think in most cases it would be inappropriate for a parent to do this but I haven't sampled the test to know for sure.
The agency was my best resource. They helped me understand how to write a contract, pick a great salary and benefits, and so on. They helped me tailor the questions to ask that pertain to me and my family. I hired the woman that was most flexible and willing to do what my family specifically needs. I felt most confident having their experience help me hire the best person in our area for the job. I used a great national agency with offices on bost coasts.
TakeCare's service is primarily targeted at parents who are hiring nannies on their own, not through an agency.
Leading agencies already use such tools to screen applicants (hopefully tests designed for screening applicants and not Myers Briggs or similar tests which have a different purpose). Even if an agency is not using such tests, they have much more experience assessing applicants than the average parent, reducing the risk of making a wrong choice.
So we have gone from agencies using them, to not using them and being used mostly by parents looking on their own.
It's also been determined that the person needs to know to administer it and interpet it properly... and what guarantee will a nanny have that any random parent is able to do this. Unlike a nanny agency???
What guarantee is there that a random parent will keep results confidential. None. How can one go on the word of the company on this?
To know if a nanny is right for a job all one needs to do is look at their work history, their volunteer history, their coursework, in combination with the background checks this will determine if they are meant to be a nanny or not. Not to mention how they conduct themselves in the interview.
Here is just one example of a nanny who was "a mother herself, had a background in child care and had a “glowing recommendation” from someone who had known her for 15 years."
(http://www.ncwanted.com/ncwanted_home/story/2470371/).
I am well aware the nannies who have lost their own life trying to save kids from fire or drowning and I have no doubt that most nannies do a fine job and many do a great job, but there are still quite a few terrible cases which we should try to eliminate by improving the screening process.
I find it amazing that among the dozens of comments to this post, many written by nannies, all we read about was nannies being offended by parents, their rights abused, etc.
Not a single word by those who care for kids about the kids themselves, their well being and their right to be safe.
Yossi,
There are several nannies here who respect children rights. We want to eliminate bad nannies. We want children to be safe from abuse. And some have even spoken of this in these series of articles. (And we have spoken about your software program at other times and places too.)
Perhaps you should take our comments into consideration and figure out how make your product, better, legal, fair, etc. so it is profitable for you and your company.
You choose to ignore that we do support the welfare of children because you are just reading that we are seeing the flaws in your product, choose to be defensive and angry, then turn around and become aggressive. (Not a good way to sell anybody on a new product.)
Speaking as someone who knows many of these posters here from all threads on this discussion board and at other discussion boards I find your implication of us being selfish very offensive because we question your product reliability. Some of the biggest critics of this software program are the biggest advocates for learning the signs of child abuse and neglect and how nannies should become mandatory reporters by knowing the laws in states in which they work.
See we nannies do value what we do. We want standards in our industry. We don't like the bad nanny situations out there, it rips our hearts out at times.
What we don't want to see is someone (God forbid a pedophile) pretending to be nanny given a green light because some weak assessment passed them. When it is proven that sexual deviants do know how to cheat on tests.
Likewise I don't want to see some honest genuine nanny being held back because she didn't lie in answering some questions.
I came to America as an Au Pair. I am now a married American citizen that works as a nanny.
Au Pair agencies use personality testing as the norm. We aren't offended when asked to take the test. We have to do a lot to get to work here legally and are more than happy to take personality tests.
I have been asked many personal questions when looking for nanny jobs, as is the norm.
Since I have become a citizen working as a nanny I have declined allowing parents to do a credit check on me, I haven't taken a drug test or had a physical exam for a nanny job, yet got the job anyway.
I'm sure if you are a great nanny and don't want to take the personality assessment and don't take it you too may get the job. Criminal checks are invasive but appropriate.
Only one responder is being angry and aggressive, not the CEO of the test. My only advice is that if you don't want to take the test, just don't take it. For those of us interested and willing to take it, let us do so in peace.
I'm wondering if Louise Woodward, the au pair who shook a baby to death in Newton took this test?
I am helping a family replace a bad Au Pair who probably took this test.
Could have Richard Figueroa or Jonathan Then passed this test with flying colors? The scary thing is undoubtably yes, because serial abusers know how to manipulate tests. Better than honest well meaning candidate for a job.
There is good and bad out there regardless, this test can not prevent that. Unfortunately, no test can. You can't begin to imagine how much I have prayed for one.
What does it prove by taking the test?
Having met as many child abuse victims as I have, there is no way I'm going sign on for something that is a false sense of security.
Post a Comment