WWYD for managers: suspect employee cheated

[ManagersDilemma]

I recently recruited someone who scored extremely highly (above the 99th percentile) on an online aptitude test. It was done at home and the results were not verified in any way. The person has now started the job and it is becoming clear that he does not have much aptitude in this particular area! He has made a reasonable start otherwise and his role was hard to fill. If you're a manager, what would you do in this situation?

Can you ask them to re-do the test?

redo test definitely. not sure about how you'd approach it though.

That's a good idea to redo the test, say you like to do it with all new recruits to monitor their progress and understanding now they've begun the role.

Don't give them any notice.

If they sat the test and didn't get a similar (say 80%+) result, I'd want to let them go because it's a serious ethical issue. So I'd be involving HR before a retest to establish the outcomes....

I scored 100% on my interview test. My manager would be delighted to confirm I'm far from a perfect employee, I'm just really good at exams is there any chance employee had seen similar before so had practiced? Otherwise a resit at work after 3 months doesn't seem unreasonable as a condition of probation?

I passed with flying colours and aptitude test for a previous role because I am good at tests etc but the job I got I had zero aptitude for but I did not cheat so be careful how you workday it.
Also you say that he has made a reasonable start and his position was difficult to fill, what are your intentions if he doesn't do as well I the test 2nd time round?

Surely they are in a probation period? If they're not up to the job during probation then you can let them go, you don't have to make it about the test.

I don't see the point in redoing the test. Either he will score low and you will have confirmation he's cheated and can sack him. Or he scores highly and is still shit at his job and then you still want to sack him.

I would talk to him and say that he has not achieved xyz in a particular area, however you recognise that he's made a good start and that you're keen to support him. Ask him what he needs, more training, something explaining. Give him clear goals that by x date you need him to be doing y.

Then follow the conversation up in writing and set a meeting for x date to discuss progress. Then at that meeting he either gets a pat on the back or you tell him you will have to let him go.

I think you need to establish what the consequence would be first. Would he have got the job if he had a lower initial score? Do you feel he can manage the role well anyhow? Would you let him go if he did cheat? Where do you stand legally.

I wouldn't retest unless I had spoken to HR first.

An aptitude test is just a potential indicator as to someone who may have the aptitude to do a role. Just like interviews they are not infallible (I know brilliant workers who interview awfully and brilliant interviewees that I wouldn't have working for me in a million years).

Definitely go down the performance expectation route and confirm that unless they meet specific criteria their role will unlikely continue beyond the probation period.

There may have been fraud involved but without proof it would just look like finding excuses/bullying someone out of a role.

Did he impress you in other areas of his application?

Do you want to get rid of them, OP? As others have said, you need to understand what you want to do as a consequence before you can decide what action to take.

Retesting to give you a reason to get rid could be risky - if he is just good at tests and aces it again, then what?

I'd start actually managing my staff.

I'd also look at changing my recruitment process if someone can ace the paper sift, testing and interview and then not perform the job role.

Catinthecorner, the Op says the person has made a reasonable start which indicates that they are monitoring the person & would otherwise be prepared to manage them into their new role.
But the Op asked for opinions about the discrepancy between the effectively self reported test at the beginning of the process, and apparent reality.
I don't take hobbies into account when appointing, but if someone said they rode horses on their CV & it turned they didn't, never had, I would find it difficult to trust them at work. I don't care out the riding as such.,,

Apologies for the errors in that post. Like PP hinted at I am competent when tested in some ways & look rather different at other times...

I agree, i think you have to have all applicants come in and sit the paper test under controlled conditions to ensure no misconduct.

Thanks - some very useful responses here. I would put money on the fact he cheated on this test. I have never seen a score so high and he out-scored a colleague who actually has a degree in the area and is good at it in day-to-day work. I'm very wary of making a false accusation though, for obvious reasons.

However, like I said, the person has made a reasonable start and I don't want to sack him. I'm just really disappointed at the lack of integrity, I guess. Perhaps I need to put this one down to experience and warn all future candidates that they'll be re-tested at interview, even if we don't actually do it.