Top 20 Assessments and Evaluation Companies of 2017

Top 20 Assessments and Evaluation Companies of 2017

Training Industry continuously monitors the training marketplace looking for the best providers of services/technologies in support of corporate learning and development. This annual list is designed to help buy-side organizations in their search for assessment and evaluation partners to evaluate an individual’s or organization’s knowledge, skills, or performance related to a particular subject, topic, or process before, during or after a training engagement.

Selection to this year’s Top 20 Assessment and Evaluation List was based on the following criteria:

  • Diversity of assessment capabilities
  • Quality and innovativeness of evaluation techniques
  • Company size and growth potential
  • Quality and number of clients/users
  • Awards, recognition and competitive differentiation

We are proud to announce that we represent not one, but two of these outstanding brands.




OOPS! Did you recruit using an Ipsative Assessment? By Chrystal Austin

OOPS! Did you recruit using an Ipsative Assessment? By Chrystal Austin

Ipsative versus Normative Assessments…

  “must-know” facts for anyone using assessments in the workplace.

There are many assessment tools on the market that are considered effective and safe to use from a legal perspective for both the employer and the employee (only if you use it for its intended purpose).

Ipsative assessments like DISC or MBTI type tools or any other IPSATIVE assessments do not compete with NORMED PSYCHOMETRIC ASSESSMENTS when applied to a HIRING/SELECTION situation.

When it comes to hiring/selection, you may ONLY use normative assessment tools.  Many reputable assessment publishers explain that their ipsative tools may not be used in hiring, however, there are many companies which still use these because they claim to know the tools well enough to interpret the information for selection of personnel.

Everyone involved in the use of assessments for recruitment and selection for an organisation must be entirely conversant with the points made here in an interview with Dr. Lindley, a well-established and respected assessment specialist in the British Psychological Society:

Mr. Creelman: “Personality tests are the tests everybody knows, but at the same time experts say don’t use it in recruitment. What can personality tests do for us in recruitment?”

Dr. Lindley: “Certainly I’d agree that DISC or Myers-Briggs type test should not be used for selection. The people who developed, published, and market these tools would also stress that. It isn’t a tool for selection; rather it’s a tool for personal development. It can be used in groups to help individuals understand one another but it’s certainly not a selection test.” For selection, you want to rule out tests that are just referring to yourself rather than comparing you to a larger population. Anything that talks about how you are better at one thing than another, but doesn’t compare you to the outside world, isn’t helpful.

What is an IPSATIVE type test or assessment?

IPSATIVE TESTS is the technical term for these types of tests which uses the “self” as the point of reference, in other words, “my opinion of me”.

The assessment participant is scored through the use of forced choice questions and responses. An Ipsative test would ask: ‘Which do you prefer, socialising or organising an event?” You might like or hate both but are required to make a forced decision as to which one you would prefer if no other option existed. You might be operating at a very low level or a very high level but all the ipsative tests will tell you is which one you prefer rather than how that preference compares to other candidates.

The test results provide insight into the relative strengths and weaknesses, but there is no objective comparison to any other individual. This makes them ineffective as hiring and selection instruments.

They are, however, very useful as developmental instruments which can be used for personal development or  Team building.  They give you very little information as to the individual’s capability. They do not provide the credibility which is required and sought by the analytical minded members of the leadership or management teams.


A Normative Assessment measures quantifiable attributes or constructs on individual scales. These are then compared against the “normed” population (in our case, the working population of South Africa).

The ProfileXT® is a normative assessment that overcomes all the shortcomings of some of the Ipsative tools described. The ProfileXT® compares the assessed candidate to two key audiences in the `outside world’ referred to by Dr. Lindley above:

  1. The general working population as represented by a sample of more than 140,000 assessment takers that form part of the validation and reliability studies for the ProfileXT® (No assessment vendor has a larger population of assessment takers in their validation study population, and this number is rising all the time thanks to ongoing research).
  2. The population of “top performers” in the position that the person is applying for in the form of the concurrent pattern developed from these top performers PXT results.

The ProfileXT® assessment can be used for developing job descriptions and position benchmarks. Results from the assessment are measured against the job benchmarks for recruitment, selection, on-boarding, development, training, coaching and succession planning.

Recruitment: The system generates unique questions based on the candidates scores or measure against the job position and allows for objective questioning from the interviewer.

Selection: When assessing multiple candidates, it clearly reports on the order of the candidates from the highest match to descending lower match percentages against the job benchmark, eliminating the need to view every report for candidates who may not be a good match to the position.

If you want to know more about this psychometric assessment and/or how it can be used for on-boarding, development, training, coaching or succession planning, call us today to see if you qualify for a risk-free assessment demonstration on one of your existing staff members.

The Interview Process Only Gives You a 14% Chance of Hiring the Right Person by Chrystal Austin

The Interview Process Only Gives You a 14% Chance of Hiring the Right Person by Chrystal Austin

So, you hired that individual who seemed full of promise. They had an amazing CV, the looks, the perfect interview, signed contract and good to go…

Then, a few months down the line, the settling-in period has ended and you’re still waiting for the results that a few months ago, seemed guaranteed. You are waiting for the “STAR” performance to kick in, but somehow feel like you were fooled by a sparkler.

In the competitive employment market, with so many people competing for positions out of desperation rather than passion, we are easily deceived by the “professional interviewees”.  Here are some suggestions, based on research, to increase the chances of hiring the right person by inserting the following processes in your hiring process:

  1. The Interview process: This includes the CV which identifies Skills-Fit/Experience and followed by ”The Interview”. By utilising this process you only have 14% chance of hiring the right person.  That is a 1 in 7 chance of hitting the mark.
  2. Reference Checking: Following up on references increases your hiring hit to 26% chance
  3. Personality Testing: By adding personality testing you increase your chances to 38%.
  4. Abilities Testing: Job-Related skills and abilities tests increase your chances to 54%.
  5. Interest Testing: Assessing an individual’s interests and comparing them to the job-interests increases your odds to 66%.  Interests are an individual’s natural motivators to do the job.
  6. Job-Match: Assess candidates using a reliable Job-Match assessment (like the PXT which includes Interest Testing) to increase your chances to a staggering 75%.

We have years of experience and multiple tools at our disposal for testing and job match. Let us help you increase your chances of hiring right.


By Chrystal Austin



(Source: Professor Mike Smith, University of Manchester, USA, August 1994, Professors John E. Hunter & Ronda R. Hunter, Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance, Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 96)

Crucial Strategies for Enhancing Organisational Talent – Part I

Crucial Strategies for Enhancing Organisational Talent – Part I

The state of the economy is unfortunate, with yet another of the three rating agencies downgrading South Africa to junk status and investors pulling out of the JSE and government bonds. Now more than ever companies have to optimise and enhance their organisational talent. While cost cutting may be unavoidable; it’s important not to fall into some of the common traps that will put you at a disadvantage when the economy turns around.

The bottom line is that you need to know your human capital inventory well enough to make the best decision, and have the courage to take calculated risks to upgrade when the opportunity presents itself.

Our researchers have identified four crucial strategies to optimise and enhance your organisational talent. These are:

  1. “Re move” your chronic under-performers
  2. Remove your dead wood
  3. Uncover your diamonds in the rough
  4. Never stop your hunt for high quality outside hires.


This blog post series will elaborates on these four crucial strategies.

1.” Re move” your chronic under-performers

How often have you seen organisations keep staff just because they are nice people that don’t cause a lot of waves even though they aren’t very good at their job? They’ve moved around and had a lot of chances, but just don’t have what it takes to be effective. This is especially important for people in the higher pay scales.

The first step is to identify the organisations least effective employees. Then determine if they are chronic low performers or just a bad fit for a particular job, or have a bad manager, insufficient training or lack of resources.

However, you need to be honest with yourself. They may be nice people, but if they can’t or won’t add enough worth, then you need to make the tough decision and let them go. If you tolerate them, then your mid to top performers lose the motivation to go above and beyond average job performance; they see poorness is both endured and accepted.

Do you have the data to support your decisions?

These decisions are best made when supported by facts as opposed to opinion. There are many assessment tools that give you objective data to determine if an employee is a chronic under-performer or the victim of other circumstances that can be overcome. Without valid measurement tools management becomes very difficult.