Washington State Department of Retirement Systems interview questions

I was delighted to learn I was selected as a qualified candidate! This selection bestowed upon me an invitation to take a “Skills Assessment” test. Since personal attendance was required and mandatory, and since I am out-of-state, I decided to invest over $700 in airfare and car rental fees to travel to Olympia, Washington for the assessment. Once I was there it became apparent they had selected around 20-30, possibly more, candidates to take the assessment for ONE JOB. The assessment was over two hours long and purported to test Excel and Word skills. However it became apparent during the exam they were testing more than just Word and Excel skills. As candidates, we received a page describing the selection process. DRS’ selection process uses a “multiple hurdle” procedure whereby candidates must pass the skills assessment test (presumably by scoring above a certain but unknown cut-off score) to continue within the selection process. It is a pass or fail approach. If we pass, our name is forwarded to the hiring leader for consideration for an interview. In other words, DRS relies on this one test, exclusively, to determine if you make it to the next round. I was rather shocked to learn the Washington State, who I regard as more progressive and cutting-edge as far as employment and HR policies are concerned, was doing this! This is contrary to the U.S. Department of Labor Best Practices which directs human resources officers to use the “whole person” approach. This would mean if that DRS actually followed the Department of Labor's Best Practices it would not rely too much on any one test to make decisions, but would instead use it only as a component. According to the US Dept Of Labor Best Practices the use of these skills assessment tests “can result in high levels of adverse impacts.” This is even more true where the test is relied on exclusively and the whole person approach is not used, such as how DRS operates. DRS further scoffs Best Practices by using an over two hour initial assessment. Most human resources professionals will advise thinking twice about using any test longer than 30 minutes. “Asking a candidate to sit for more than 30 minutes is simply bad PR and a poor experience for the user.” Only as candidates move further along in the application process and the dialogue with the employer develops, does it become more acceptable for assessments to take longer. So my shocking conclusion is that the State of Washington Department of Retirement Systems may be setting itself up for a disparate impact complaint. I expect to see this type of ill-informed policy in use in the state where I currently live, but not in Washington State! I expect better of Washington State. And, while no experience is a bad experience, I can’t say I would recommend applying for a job with this department. They are a great example of what not to do for superior and cost effective talent acquisition.

First, I had to take a skills test to make it into the candidate pool. The test consisted of three parts: a basic math test (multiple choice), a business letter writing test, and a multiple choice test where I had to show that I understood how to read the Revised Code of Washington and the Washington Administrative Code.