Graphology in Recruitment – write or wrong?

I believe there is something very alluring about the concept of graphology. 

Who couldn’t imagine that there would be a link between how you write and who you are?

Over the years I’ve wondered about the actual usage of graphology within the world of selection. When I was trained nearly 20 years ago by Saville and Holdsworth graphology was poo-poo’d along with astronomy as a measure of suitability for a role. However, still I wanted there to be something tangible and useful and relevant in the art of handwriting analysis.

So I contacted the British Institute of Graphology to ask if they’d like to analyse my scribble and I posed what I thought was a very simple question on the HR Users of Psychometrics LinkedIn Group. What I asked was I’m blogging about the use of graphology for recruitment. Anyone ever used it?”  However, the majority of comments have answered the question “Should you use graphology for recruitment?”. More than 50 comments later I’m pretty sure they all said NO!

If you are interested in the subject you should really check out the LinkedIn discussion, however, some of the key comments are:

• The Roberston & Smith paper on efficacy of employee selection methods puts it’s predictive qualities at around 1%.
• The Barnum effect is often seen in ‘projective testing‘.
• The respected science on assessment methods shows that the ability of graphology to accurately predict work related information is no better than chance and is not to be recommended for that purpose.
• One of the reasons I think graphology continues to engage interest is the intuitive appeal of projective techniques.
• It’s about as effective as Phrenology (having the bumps on your head read).
• Check out James Randi – ‘Psychic Investigator’ proving the in-effectiveness of graphology.

In the UK only 7% of companies use projective testing (including graphology) for recruitment selection. In France, Israel and Latin America the figure is much higher. Felipe Cuadra, who is an Organisational Psychologist, pointed me towards this fascinating table (see below) showing that over 40% of employers in Chile use graphology and an amazing 60% use an ink-blot test! I wish I could easily find a figure for the attrition rate in these organisations!

As I mentioned at the start I have had my handwriting analysed and am blogging about those results separately (and will link here), I really enjoyed my conversations with the Chair of the British Graphology Institute and love the passion that he and his colleagues have for their art.

However, it’s with some sadness that I have to conclude that in high stake decisions (of which recruitment is one) you need to go ONLY with the tools that have the strongest basis in fact and I’m afraid I can’t include graphology in that list.