drug testing is falling out of favor:
it costs a fortune and alienates workers.
Wisdom is knowledge of certain principles and causes.
Aristotle/The Ethics (c 350 BC).
By David W. Pearson, Ph.D.
|
|
Think for a moment, America!
Is it wiser to spend a considerable amount of money to be certain only of one thing and at one time?
Or is it more prudent to learn more of what may influence or motivate a person's behavior throughout their business life and across a broad spectrum of social interaction?
Drug testing losing favor with employers.
Screening not working as hoped in 1980s
|
Source: The Dallas Morning News
01/29/2001
|
Drug testing is apparently losing popularity in the United States.
The American Management Association was reported in a recent edition of The Dallas Morning News
as stating that "large numbers of job-seekers are refusing the tests as an invasion of privacy and
turning to employers who don't require them."
Eric Greenberg, Director of Management Studies for the New York-based management association
was quoted as saying, "There has been a statistically significant decline in testing. It seems logical
to assume that comes, in part, because of concerns over recruitment and retention." At the same
time, researchers are finding that drug testing doesn't deter drug use or boost productivity as much
as it was hoped in the 1980s, when it was first used on a large scale.
In the same article, an EDS spokeswoman commented on negative repercussions of attempting drug
testing abroad, "Because of cultural differences, it's not as accepted there, and we would no longer
be considered a preferred employer," said Leslie Hueholt. "It would apparently impact our ability to
recruit in Europe and Canada."
In the article, The Dallas Morning News also reported that a 1998 analysis of 63 computer equipment
and software firms by economics professors at Le Moyne College in Syracuse, N.Y., concluded drug testing
can sometimes stymie worker productivity. In the article, Dr. Edward Shepard, one of the two authors of
the study, speculated that the lower productivity is the result of a distrustful office environment created by
drug testing.
Dr. Shepard was reported as saying, "I've never really seen a study showing testing would have a positive
effect on productivity. It costs a lot and doesn't get you much, if anything."
Amazingly, for just over twenty years America has bowed to the influence of marketing and peer pressure, and opted for the
highly invasive and uninsightful expense of drug testing. Meanwhile, a far more viable and ultimately indicative alternative has
existed for years prior and will continue to prove its much greater worth for years to come.
The fact that someone is not "using" drugs or alcohol on the day of test does not mean they are without a tendency to do so. A drug test tells the employer nothing of an inclination -- only of an instance.
On the other hand, an Attitude Test will indicate multiple propensities -- and varying degrees of potential. Will anger be expressed as energy to complete a project, or will it be vented against other workers? Will an indifference to drug or alcohol use grow into more than tacit approval and possibly result in promotion of illegal substances? Is that same indifference extended to work ethic and loyalty to company and co-workers resulting in absenteeism and worse?
As Aristotle noted, more than two thousand years before drug tests, true wisdom is gained from a knowledge of what causes or motivates individuals. All other knowledge is isolated and fleeting. Small wonder America is waking up to the lack of value gained from drug or any other "specialized" testing. Amazingly, it has taken almost twenty years to wise-up to what far greater minds realized thousands of years before.
The answer for America is simple. Use MindData's Attitude Indexes and find out more with longer-term applicability for much
less cost.
|
|
 Requires Flash Player
|
|
Served in the U.S. Air Force as a jet fighter pilot, David Pearson is a noted behavioral scientist. David Pearson was a contributing author of the EEOC's Uniform
Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures and also contributed to the Tower Amendment to Title VII.12. As a nationally
recognized authority on employment practices and behavioral tendency profiling, Dr. Pearson has been quoted in publications
from Newsweek to The Wall Street Journal.
Dr. Pearson has been retained as an expert witness for the successful defense of major companies including Adolph Coors,
Frontier Airlines, the City and County of Denver, Detroit Edison, and Martin Marietta. David Pearson has earned a Master of
Science and a Doctorate in Psychology. He has also received extensive legal training, and has considerable experience in statistics
and research methodology. Today, Dr. Pearson continues to make valuable contributions to MindData's business -- including
development of all new MindData products and contribution of frequent articles and insights to the MindData web site.
The opinions expressed in articles by this author do not necessarily represent
the opinions of MindData. These articles are provided as a means of informing
you of current events and opinions that impact employers and the workplace.
|
|
Requires Flash Player
|
|