Skip to main content

Article 14/2022

What is the meaning of the concepts of standardisation, reliability and validity applicable to psychometric testing?

_____________________________________

Standardisation

  • to enable an employee’s scores on a test to be meaningfully interpreted, the test is to be standardised on a population similar to that on which it has been designed to be used (e.g. in respect of 15 FQ+P, people with a wide range of technical, managerial, professional, sales and administrative/clerical roles)
  • such standardisation ensures that the scores obtained in a test can be meaningfully interpreted by referring them to a relevant distribution of scores

Reliability

  • in essence, reliability refers to the requirement that a test must consistently measure a construct
  • reliability is generally assessed using one of two different methods, namely –
  • assessing the stability of the test’s scores over a time period: referred to as temporal stability – it involves determining the extent to which a group of people obtain similar scores on a test when it is administered at two different points in time
  • internal consistency – this method of assessing a test’s reliability involves determining the extent to which, if people score one way on one item (i.e. respond to one item in an introverted way) they will respond in the same way to other items in the test that measure the same construct (i.e. respond in an introverted manner to other test items)

Validity

  • this refers to the requirement that the test should measure what it claims to measure
  • in this regard, there are two approaches, namely:
  • construct validity – by utilising this requirement, the test is required to demonstrate that it correlates with other major tests which measure related constructs but does not correlate with tests that measure different constructs
  • criterion validity – the validity of a test in terms of this method involves demonstrating that the test meaningfully predicts some real-world criteria (e.g. a valid test of extroversion might be expected to predict success in sales roles, while a valid test of consciousness might be expected to predict success in administrative roles)
November 9, 2026

Section 187(1)(f) of the LRA reads as follows: ‘A dismissal is automatically unfair if the reason for the dismissal is that the employer unfairly discriminated against the employee, directly or indirectly, on any arbitrary ground, including but not limited to religion, conscience and belief”.

In terms of s187(2)(a) of the LRA, despite the aforesaid s187(1)(f), a dismissal may be fair if the reason for the dismissal is based on the inherent requirements of a particular job.

What approach is to be followed to determine, firstly, whether the reason for the dismissal on the basis of religion, conscience or belief is based upon an inherent requirement of a particular job?

And, secondly, what approach is to be followed to determine whether or not an employer complied with its duty to reasonably accommodate the aforesaid category of employees?

November 2, 2026

In the previous article, we set out the traditional approach to s187(2)(b) of the LRA, covering the scenario where an employee reached the normal or agreed-upon retirement age, but continued to work beyond such age. The constitutional court, in Motor Industry Staff Association and Another v Great South Auto Body CC t/a Great South Panelbeaters (Landman); Solidarity obo Strydom and Others v State Information Technology Agency Soc Ltd (Solidarity) – combinedly referred to as Landman; Solidarity – had the opportunity to scrutinise such traditional approach and delivered three conflicting judgments. So, what approach should role players now employ, seeing that consensus was not reached in the constitutional court?

October 26, 2026

In terms of s187(1)(f) of the LRA, a dismissal is automatically unfair if the reason for the dismissal is that the employer unfairly discriminated against the employee, directly or indirectly, on any arbitrary ground, including, but not limited to, age.

In terms of s187(2)(b) of the LRA, despite s187(1)(f), dismissal, based on age, is fair if the employee has reached the normal or agreed retirement age for persons employed in that capacity.

What is the approach traditionally adopted where an employer permits an employee to work beyond the normal or agreed-upon retirement age and subsequently wishes to terminate the services of the employee, based on age, and wishes to rely on the defence as set out in s187(2)(b)?