You don’t have to be in the professional world long before you will likely encounter some form of a competency model in your organization. While the development of an effective competency model is no small task, the end result is simple, easy to understand, and very effective at establishing a framework for success. When developed correctly and with the support of the organization, a competency model can be an effective foundation for strategic staffing, training and development, and performance management. However, that is where the simplicity ends.

At Hogan, we can effectively measure an individual’s performance level against an organization’s pre-determined competency model. Hogan has developed a systematic, scientific approach, leveraging 30+ years of criterion evidence, to map just about any competency to the personality constructs measured in Hogan’s assessment inventories. As a result, our clients have responded positively, and competency mapping has become a routine service provided by our research team. These robust competency mappings can be used to help organizations strategically select new hires and develop incumbents.

It is important to understand that the intersection of competencies, personality traits, and the behaviors described can be very complex. I always suggest that the organization clearly define the role of the competency model and the desired assessments in the context of the selection, succession, and/or development process. The most effective implementations I’ve seen include elements of both tools, not simply one or the other.

Through Hogan’s research process, we can develop a scoring algorithm which will accurately predict someone’s innate ability based on their responses to our core personality inventories. If you don’t have clear understanding of what underlying personality traits and values are influencing an individual’s ability, development efforts will stall. Without these key links of behavioral development, simply knowing how someone compares to your competency model only tells half the story.

I live for pats on the back. They keep me motivated and are a much appreciated reward for a job well done. There are even times I resent not receiving my duly earned recognition, and therefore, as a manager, I do my best to ensure everyone on my team is recognized for a job well done. I do this through a variety of different mediums…verbally, publicly, in an email, a personal note, or through some type of gift. It’s a vicious animal; I appreciate when I am recognized, therefore work hard to receive said recognition, and I assumed everyone appreciates recognition as much as I do. I was an unconsciously competent manager.

We all have them, a set of innate preferences and intrinsic motivators which unconsciously impact our lives on a daily basis. This group of preferences is at the core of who we are as a person and largely dictates our managerial/leadership style. As leaders, we unconsciously create an environment around ourselves which aligns with our own motivators and preferences. As in the example above, I was managing my team based on my own preference for pats on the back, assuming everyone valued recognition as a motivator. It was not until I fully understood my own unconscious biases that I could understand the impact they had on my managerial effectiveness.

The concept of validity is at the core of any personality assessment. There are many approaches to developing a valid assessment, and unfortunately, in an industry with very little regulation, validity varies greatly between providers. From the user’s perspective, validity should be measured simply by the assessment’s ability to accurately predict what the publisher claims it will predict.

Of course all valid assessment providers publish in-depth technical manuals describing the assessment’s conceptual background, underlying construction, validity, normative sample, etc. So, my first recommendation would be to consult the assessment provider’s technical manual. While the technical manual should provide scientific foundation and alleviate any validity doubts, I often challenge clients and prospects to consider other components of the validity equation when exploring assessment providers. Take a closer look at the assessment provider itself and consider a few relevant points:

1. Who’s the publisher? More specifically, who created the initial items in the assessment and how are they maintained? Do they have any IO Psychologists on staff? Can you pick up the phone and speak directly with the author of the assessment? Is the assessment the core of the provider’s business, or is it just one of a thousand different products offered? What contributions have the publisher made to the scientific advancement of personality assessments?

2. Longevity? How long has the assessment been in use? Often times the size of the normative sample will provide insights to the longevity of the assessment. Has the assessment ever been legally challenged? Does the assessment provider have a solid track record and reputation in the industry? Do they have an archival database of assessment results and criterion data?

3. Purpose? Trace back the foundation of the instrument to its original intent; was the assessment designed to be used in the business world to predict business outcomes? Strategic self-awareness is only relevant if it is tied back to real business challenges and situations.

4. Relevance? Will the assessment provider’s offerings deliver the content necessary to meet the goals and objectives of your assessment initiatives? If an assessment provides nothing but glowing compliments to participants, it creates a false sense of validity; who is going to argue with an assessment that tells us how great we are? Do the constructs measured provide both strengths and weaknesses?

5. Depth of content? Does the provider publish multiple assessments to capture different aspects of personality? Can those assessments be combined to provide a holistic approach to managing talent? Does the provider restrict administration of their assessments to those qualified to interpret and understand the results? Does the provider offer a certification process?

6. Global Mindset? Has the assessment been adapted to today’s global business climate? Does the provider have a true global normative sample? Can you be assured participants are being measured with the same yardstick across borders? Do they offer local support for your global initiatives?

With over 3000 domestic assessment companies in the marketplace, due diligence is critical when selecting a provider. Any assessment provider can create clever marketing propaganda simplifying the assessment validity equation to a few bar charts, coefficients, or feel good comments. Evaluating your prospects according to the guidelines above, however, will provide a much clearer picture of whether or not those assessments will perform as advertised.