Yes, we have a "skills and knowledge" test for Floor Inspectors. I wrote it because our interviewing / hiring process is nothing but word of mouth and fuzzy logic. And that's OK, as far as that goes, because interviewing revolves around talking to someone (assuming the right questions are being asked) and evaluating their fit for the job (assuming the person doing the interviewing has the judgment and perspective to do so accurately).
The practical thing is to measure someone's actual experience & capability against what's being claimed as well as measuring the Company's ability to communicate job requirements clearly. This has nothing to do with anyone being deceptive. If "The Company" fails to accurately assess an applicant's capabilities we've not done our jobs as "The Company". We disservice the Applicant, we disservice the existing workforce, we potentially cause unnecessary problems for all and by extension our customers.
Our Quality Inspector Basic Skills Test is covers the following:
1) Put the Applicant at ease by providing context and reasoning for taking the test as part of the Interview.
"• Relax, answer questions honestly, then turn in the test and continue with the rest of the Interview.
• Test results will be reviewed afterwards simply as a gage of skills demonstrated, to understand where, if any, on-the-job training might need to be focused.
• This test is not intended as an arbitrary pass/fail measure for hiring."
2) The test identifies, in objective fashion, what experience/skills are possessed by the Applicant so that we can set expectations on ourselves, The Company, for the correct on-the-job Training required should we feel the Applicant is a match for hiring in all other respects.
3) We reasonably "protect" the existing workforce from unreasonable burden, skewed expectations, disruption, etc.
Most of the test questions use either photographs of tools, JPG snippets from Blueprints, or a sample list of GT$T symbols they must identify.
I'm less interested in an "advanced" skill that someone might reasonably grow into later if it's an "offline" skill, and am more immediately interested in skills that come into play instantly when an Inspector walks up to a Machinist to perform an Inspection. That's a work-relationship / interface dynamic that should be positive and clean, not negative and annoying (for all concerned). Machinists are making product that gets us paid, the Inspector is having to run around between multiple positions. Everyone needs to interface cleanly with no disruptions.
Examples out of the test include identifying tools from photos, GD&T symbol identification, sample blueprint feature/dim identification, basic math, using indicating mics and what are the correct offsets if your calibration standard is say +.0002 of target, non-conformance procedures, and making decisions on what tools should be used versus the required tolerances (e.g. .+/- .005 vs +/- .0002).
The Test contains 25 questions. I felt that more was too much, a little less might have been OK, but 25 was fine based on the mix of questions, technical vs procedures.
It gives us the information about the applicant we need to calibrate our own understanding of their capabilities, and where any on the job training may be needed. Intent and planning with people, instead of find out and trip over.