When psychologists talk about the Dark Triad, they mean narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. But that list doesn’t cover all the dark-side personality characteristics.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, chief science officer, and Blake Loepp, PR manager, spoke with Peter Harms, PhD, professor of management at the University of Alabama, about dark-side behaviors not covered by the Dark Triad.

Peter has studied the dark side of personality for more than 20 years. He started his career working with Dr. Delroy Paulhus, who coined the phrase “Dark Triad” in 2002.

Let’s dive in and explore what the Dark Triad misses and dark-side tendencies in leadership.

What Is the Dark Triad?

The Dark Triad refers to three personality-based syndromes or behaviors: (1) narcissism, (2) Machiavellianism, and (3) psychopathy. The syndromes in this triad are considered subclinical, meaning not a clinical disorder but lying right on the edge of legality.

• Narcissism – Toxic self-esteem that combines believing you are great and wanting to be admired to the extent that you compete with or exploit others
• Machiavellianism – Pleasure in manipulating others with chronic, habitual lying
• Psychopathy – Impulsivity, recklessness, and lack of ability to experience emotions, especially empathy

A common element shared among the Dark Triad is being willing to exploit or hurt other people to pursue one’s agenda. A narcissist typically seems energetic and confident in the short term but may become aggressive or competitive in the long term. A Machiavellian tends to seem politically savvy but uses lies to stay ahead. A psychopath can be curious about others but also act vicious or brutal toward them. “They’ve all got this common hostility towards others or an ambivalence towards the feelings of other people,” Peter said.

The Dark Triad isn’t a theoretical model but a way to think about trends in psychological literature. Social psychologists studied narcissists, personality psychologists and political psychologists studied Machiavellians, and forensic psychologists and clinical psychologists studied psychopaths. These elements of personality and behavior weren’t well represented in the Big Five, or five-factor model (FFM), which categorizes more positive or neutral aspects of personality.

The Dark Triad can be challenging to study for two reasons. The method of study is usually self-report and questionnaires. However, because people who have these characteristics habitually exaggerate, lie, or fail to comprehend emotion, interpreting these measurements is hard. As well, the behaviors associated with each syndrome often overlap, leading to difficulty differentiating them.

Other Dark Personality Characteristics

In 1997, Drs. Robert and Joyce Hogan introduced the Hogan Development Survey (HDS), which measures 11 potentially career-derailing behaviors. The HDS isn’t a clinical assessment and doesn’t diagnose clinical conditions. However, certain HDS scales do align somewhat with the Dark Triad.

• Narcissism corresponds to HDS Bold. Bold has elements of entitlement, overconfidence, and exaggerating one’s abilities, but it doesn’t measure the vanity or exploitative behaviors that characterize narcissism.
• Machiavellianism corresponds to HDS Skeptical. Skeptical has elements of being cynical and mistrusting, but it doesn’t measure the manipulativeness that characterizes Machiavellianism.
• Psychopathy corresponds to HDS Mischievous. Mischievous has elements of risky and impulsive behavior, but it doesn’t measure the inabilities to experience emotion or learn from negative feedback that characterize psychopathy.

A more significant difference between the Dark Triad and the HDS is intent. The HDS measures personality strengths. When overused, these can become obstacles that can derail career success. Fundamentally, though, the scales on the HDS are positive. The characteristics of the Dark Triad are not positive. “They are almost uniformly negative in how they impact other people,” Peter said.

What the Dark Triad Misses

The Dark Triad isn’t a complete taxonomy of dark-side characteristics. Organizational psychologists should recognize that the other characteristics are important too. Seemingly positive characteristics can turn negative depending on the context or degree—such as perfectionism, dependency, and competitiveness. Spitefulness and greed are also becoming newly popular dark characteristics to study.

The Dark Triad misses listing quite a few dark characteristics. Peter specifically called out paranoia as the biggest gap in studying dark characteristics. “It can feed on itself,” he said. “If you treat other people skeptically, then they act in a way that justifies your skepticism.” A need exists for research to understand how this characteristic plays out in the workplace.

Another thing the Dark Triad misses is the moral element of behavior. In addition to unwillingness to trust and engage in emotional intimacy, the three syndromes of the Dark Triad tend not to be concerned with morality. A narcissist isn’t likely to wish they were less arrogant; instead, they would wish others could understand their greatness. Many Machiavellians would agree that they are immoral. They might justify their actions by saying the world is an immoral place and a smart person rises above morality. Some psychopaths would be aware they don’t experience emotions and would feel curiosity and regret about their lack of empathy. But overall, morality just doesn’t interest the Dark Triad: “The people who exhibit these characteristics don’t want to change that much,” Peter said.

The Dark Triad in Leadership

“Pretty much anytime you’ve got a leader, they’re a narcissist,” Peter said, especially national leaders. They tend to believe that they personally are the solution to national or global problems.

Peter described the narcissism of former US Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump and the paranoia of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Obama seemed to view himself as a world-changing leader whose time in office would be an inflection point in global events. Similarly, Trump said he was going to be the best president and get the most done. Getting to the top in politics requires self-confidence, which can easily become overconfidence given the nature of the office itself. President Putin displays many characteristics on the Dark Triad, as well as paranoia. As a former KGB agent, Putin continues to operate in his present role as a spy who is surrounded by spies. Peter said that deceptive behavior has helped Putin get ahead sometimes, but it also causes him problems. “His paranoia has created so much distance that it’s causing his downfall,” he added.

Power can act as a key to opening Dark Triad tendencies, which aren’t always evident when leaders are still striving to reach their goals. Having attained an elite role, leaders may become unguarded. “That’s when the dark side really starts leaking out—when you’re on top,” Peter said.

What Organizations Can Do

Organizations need to understand the nature of dark-side traits. Not all of them are explosive headline grabbers. It’s vital to pay attention to leader behavior, measure dark-side tendencies, and provide coaching and resources for leadership development.

Organizations should also be aware that men tend to score higher on Dark Triad characteristics such as boldness, self-promotion, and excessive risk taking, which can lead to company-destroying news events. Women tend to score higher on dark-side characteristics such as perfectionism, passive aggression, and eagerness to please, which can lead to toxic work environments and decreased retention. These differences may also bias leadership selection in favor of men. Gender inequity issues matter greatly to employee and organizational well-being.

“We can’t just look for the bright red flashing lights. We have to look at all the warning signals,” Peter said.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 72 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

With limited guidelines or consensus on how leaders should choose, administer, and debrief their employees and candidates using workplace assessments, practitioners and academics alike need a code of ethics. The American Psychological Association’s Ethics Code and Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Section Procedures exist, but talent management professionals need a comprehensive understanding of how to use these guidelines when using workplace assessments.

Why Are Ethics in Workplace Assessments So Important?

Why is the study of ethics in the use of assessments so important, and why should we continue to develop and modify existing ethical guidelines for their use? The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) Committee for the Advancement of Professional Ethics states, “We depend on the trust of others in order to do our work and we don’t earn that trust without treating them honestly and respectfully (i.e., ethically).”¹ We need standard guidelines for how to handle different situations, especially those in which the best solution varies depending on specific or changing circumstances.

When guidelines don’t exist or talent management professionals do not adhere to them, decision-makers are at risk of doing harm to candidates and employees. For example, it is well known that cognitive tests have the potential for adverse impact when used as the sole factor in hiring decisions because they can bias the selection rate against protected groups of people.

For practitioners to use cognitive tests ethically and avoid discrimination, ethical codes and guidelines need to be considered. When using a cognitive test for selection purposes in an ethical manner, the practitioner must be able to demonstrate that the cognitive test is job relevant and convey that cognitive ability scores predict job performance. At Hogan, we recommend a job analysis and criterion-related validity study, as well as pairing cognitive tests with a well-validated personality assessment. Essentially, scientific evidence is necessary for cognitive tests to be used ethically in the workplace.

So what other ethical considerations do we need to keep in mind when using workplace assessments?

When Is It Appropriate to Use Workplace Assessments?

While SIOP has adopted the APA ethics code, IO psychologists are not the only ones using assessments in the workplace. Our industry colleagues include talent management professionals, consultants, coaches, and other assessment users who all need to keep ethical guidelines in mind when using workplace assessments.  

If your organization has psychologists on staff, they should support their psychological opinions with assessments that sufficiently support their theses and conclusions. However, when this is not possible, the psychologist should document the efforts taken and use the information available to them to support their opinions.²

Talent management professionals should use assessments solely for the specific purposes for which they have been validated. For example, if you know an assessment is not validated for selection use, then it would be unethical to utilize that assessment tool for selection purposes. One should be able to request the assessment’s technical manual or other documentation to confirm the purposes for which the assessment has been validated. Additionally, talent management professionals should clearly define what they’re trying to measure and should only use assessments that are aligned with that goal. Only assessments whose validity and reliability have been tested and accepted for the purposes of that goal should be used.²

How Do You Develop a Workplace Assessment?

Assessment developers should have a strong psychological background along with modern scientific knowledge of assessment design, validation, reduction of adverse impact, and recommendations for use.² Hogan’s own assessments were developed through a rigorous psychometric development process and continue to be updated through a kaizen psychometric approach.

Hogan founders Drs. Robert and Joyce Hogan used the five-factor model (FFM), the most widely agreed upon measure of personality, and socioanalytic theory to write items that reflected the FFM dimensions. Then, they pilot tested these items using undergraduate samples. The pilot testing continued until they had developed 420 items. Those became the first version of the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), which today uses seven scales and 42 subscales to assess personality. Since then, Hogan has focused on continually improving our assessments.

How Should Workplace Assessments Be Used?

When picking an assessment to use, it is best practice to describe the purpose, norms, validity, and reliability of the processes, as well as your qualifications for administering and interpreting the assessments. Qualifications may include, but are not limited to, product-specific certifications, formal or informal product training, and coaching certification. Check with your assessment provider to confirm what qualifications are required.²

In addition to using valid and reliable assessments, you should use current assessments to base your opinions and decisions. The most up-to-date assessments must serve the purpose of your use of the chosen assessment. Talent management professionals should do their ethical due diligence by asking the assessment publisher when the assessment was last updated, how frequently the assessment is updated, and what updates were made.²

When administering assessments, talent management professionals must obtain the assessment taker’s informed consent, except when a legal requirement exists, the informed consent is implied, or the purpose of the assessment is to determine decision-making ability. When using an interpreter to obtain informed consent, strict confidentiality of test results must be maintained, which includes recommendations and reports.²

After the assessment is completed, the talent management professional should be aware of all persons identified to receive test data and should not release test data to unidentified people. The ethical code is in place to prevent the misrepresentation of test data and to lawfully protect confidential information.²

What Else Should You Know About Ethics in Workplace Assessments?

If you are ever unsure of how to ethically proceed in a given situation, it’s OK! That is a good time to seek professional advice. Current Hogan clients can reach out to their Hogan consultant for assistance and guidance. Additionally, you can reach out to the CAPE committee for support with ethical decision-making and assessment use. The CAPE committee can also provide resources on developing an ethics code, teaching ethics in an academic setting, and guidelines for talent management professionals.  

If you will be attending the upcoming SIOP conference, join Hogan’s Paige Brown and the CAPE committee on April 20 at 5:00 p.m. in room 209 to discuss current and future ethical issues—specifically how the integration of assessments, technology, and the workplace shape ethical considerations.

This blog post was written by Paige Brown, MBA, MA, solutions partners consultant.

References

1. Blackman, G. (n.d.). Committee for the Advancement of Professional Ethics (CAPE). Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. https://www.siop.org/Career-Center/Professional-Ethics
2. American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2002, amended effective June 1, 2010, and January 1, 2017). http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.html

Hogan is proud and pleased to be a platinum sponsor and participant at the 38th annual Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) conference. Held in Boston, Massachusetts, and online from April 19 through April 22, 2023, the SIOP conference will be another opportunity for Hogan to showcase our thought leadership in personality assessment, leadership development, artificial intelligence, and more. Numerous Hogan employees will attend SIOP 2023, with many of them participating as panelists, presenters, speakers, and session chairs.

We are particularly excited to highlight our tech demo of the Hogan Leadership Experience (HLX), which is redefining leadership with assessment-driven development plans and executive coaching. Hogan’s Director of Global Learning and Development Jackie VanBroekhoven Sahm and Learning Solutions Manager Jocelyn Hays will be demonstrating HLX on Friday, April 20. You definitely want to see this (and you definitely don’t want to miss our drawing for an Apple Watch).

Our base of operations will be booth 101. Stop by to see HLX demos in the booth—and we’ll have some swag to give away!

You can also find us day by day at the sessions below. Note that times are given in Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).

Thursday, April 20, 2023

SIOP Intelligence on AI: Legal, Practice, and Ethics Perspectives

Chase Winterberg, JD, PhD, panelist | 9:00 a.m., Ballroom C

Bringing together experts from academia, internal and external consulting, and law, this panel comes in the wake of NYC Local Law 144, which stipulates that automated employment decision tools must undergo bias audits. This session aims to synthesize and integrate the existing guidance and to begin to lay the framework for best practices when conducting bias audits. Following a State of the Union address, representatives from their respective fields will briefly cover key considerations, and then the chair will facilitate discussion based on preplanned questions and audience input.

Sounds of Silence: Embracing Introversion in the Hum of the Modern Workplace

Kimberly Nei, PhD, presenter | 2:00 p.m., Ballroom A

This panel provides a diverse and comprehensive discussion about introversion in the workplace. Five panelists who span academia, practice, business, psychology, the US, and Australia answer questions about introversion in the context of teams, assessments, measurement, work success, and mistreatment. The goal of this session is to shine light on the oft-neglected strengths of introversion in successful workplaces and fulfilling careers. Authors hope this discussion inspires deeper conversations on the issue, more research, and organizational initiatives.

Overlap and Differences Between Psychological Safety and DEI Competencies for Leaders

Linda Muller, MS, presenter; Becca Burchette, MS, coauthor; Zayna Hustoft, coauthor; Matt Lemming, MA, coauthor; Kimberly Nei, PhD, coauthor | 4:00 p.m., Exhibit Hall

Literature to date has largely considered diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and psychological safety as separate constructs that uniquely contribute to an organization’s culture, despite their similarities. Authors used several statistical analyses including EFA, LPA, correlation, and regression to determine the degree of overlap and difference between these constructs using an archival dataset of more than 10,000 leaders at nearly 3,000 companies across the globe. Findings have implications for practitioners, consultants, and leaders who wish to foster organizational diversity and inclusion.

A World Without Assessments: Rolling the Dice on Candidates?

Chase Winterberg, JD, PhD, panelist; Brandon Ferrell, PhD, panelist | 4:00 p.m., room 202

This session reviews and tries to understand deteriorating organizational, political, and social attitudes toward employment testing. Authors will identify likely causes of this change in attitudes, discuss its effects, and will review similar shifts seen with educational and certification/licensure testing. The final goal for this session is to identify ways test publishers and test users can begin to rehabilitate testing’s reputation, combining what test users in other fields have learned and acknowledging what test critics get right.

Ethical Considerations in Workplace Assessments: An Interactive Discussion

Paige Brown, MBA, MA, presenter | 5:00 p.m., room 209

With limited guidelines or consensus on how leaders should choose, administer, and debrief their employees using workplace assessments, practitioners and academics alike need a code of ethics. However, having a code of ethics in place is not enough. Practitioners and academics need a comprehensive understanding of how to use this code of ethics when using workplace assessments. This session will be an interactive discussion for practitioners and academics in all job levels who are interested in using workplace assessments in an ethical manner.

Friday, April 21, 2023

Ethical Decision-Making: An Interactive Session Using Realistic Scenarios

Paige Brown, MBA, MA, presenter | 8:00 a.m., Ballroom A

Authors propose an interactive session aimed at facilitating ethical decision-making (EDM) using SIOP’s Committee for the Advancement of Professional Ethics’ (CAPE) Ethical Reflection Tool (CERT). Session participants will engage in reading and discussing brief ethical scenarios in small groups. Ultimately, groups will rate the overall ethicality of their proposed responses using an audience engagement platform, such as Mentimeter. At the end, participants will learn about resources available through CAPE (including the CERT) for teaching ethics.

Causes and Outcomes of Self-Other Rating Agreement in 360 Feedback

Ryne Sherman, PhD, presenter; Weiwen Nie, PhD, presenter | 9:00 a.m., room 208

This symposium presents four recent investigations into the causes and outcomes of self–other (dis)agreement in 360-degree assessments. The symposium is appropriate for both scientists and practitioners and requires intermediate understanding of the topic. The four studies explored self-other agreement on personality and behavior reports. A special feature of the symposium is the exploration of the impact of self-other rating (dis)agreement on diverse practical outcomes such as interpersonal behavior, leadership behavior, workplace performance and reputation, and counterproductive behavior. Drs. Sherman and Nie will present “Self-Awareness of Workplace Reputation: A 360-Degree Analysis.”

Humor and Hogan: Examining Humor Styles with the Hogan Personality Inventory

Cody Warren, MA, presenter; Jessie McClure, MA, coauthor; Mark Shoemaker, MA, coauthor | 10:30 a.m., Exhibit Hall

Authors examined four humor styles (affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive, and self-defeating) using the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ) and their relationships to personality characteristics measured by a work-based personality assessment (Hogan Personality Inventory; HPI). Significant relationships were found among all humor styles and a number of personality scales, which can assist in providing self-awareness of an individual’s personality and how that related to their humor style.

Redefine Executive Coaching with the Hogan Leadership Experience

Jackie VanBroekhoven Sahm, MS, speaker; Jocelyn Hays, MS, speaker | 2:00 p.m., room 206

Developing and coaching leaders without assessment is akin to allowing a physician to treat elite athletes without conducting any diagnostic medical tests. Yet even when an assessment is used in leadership development, most of the products available today are too generalized and lack impact; abstract, complex, and difficult to action; or fun, flashy, and flimsy.

The Hogan Leadership Experience (HLX) is a new product that reimagines top executives’ experience with assessments, coaching, and development. This bespoke technology reinvents science-driven executive coaching and ultimately redefines leadership itself. Seamlessly integrated into talent management initiatives, HLX will fuel more effective development planning and long-lasting behavior change.

Join our tech demonstration to see how Hogan is using interactive technology and the science of personality to empower leaders to build high-performing teams. People who attend the tech demo and provide us with their information will be entered into a drawing for an Apple Watch. Will you win?

IOs for Social Good: Using Research and Evidence for Police Reform

Chase Winterberg, JD, PhD, presenter; Deidre Hall, MS, MA, presenter | 2:00 p.m., room 203

According to The Washington Post, 1,047 people have been shot and killed by police in the last year and, unsurprisingly, Black Americans were killed at a higher rate. Many remember Michael Brown, killed in 2014; Philando Castile, killed in 2016; George Floyd, killed in 2020; and many others. How do we fix this? In this dynamic, action-oriented session, authors will start with a presentation of research on police personality traits followed by an interactive design-thinking session led by an expert facilitator and transition to a presentation around how IO can influence legislation.

Unanswered Questions for Personality-Based Team Interventions

Jessie McClure, MA, panelist | 5:00 p.m., room 312

This panel discussion will explore the current state of knowledge on personality-based developmental interventions for groups and teams. The panelists will draw on the current research literature, as well as their experiences implementing developmental team interventions during their time at companies such as Walmart, PepsiCo, and Hogan Assessments. Specific topics will include purpose and design of personality-based developmental interventions, current state of research on this topic, and next steps for practitioners and scholars to advance this popular yet understudied form of intervention.

Saturday, April 22, 2023

Let’s Go, Team! Best Practices and Lessons Learned for Team Effectiveness Interventions

Jessie McClure, MA, primary chair; Jessica McDuffie, MS, secondary chair | 11:30 a.m., room 309

In today’s business world, it is critical for teams to be able to work effectively together quickly. Leaders need to be open to and understand when to introduce team development interventions. This session will present best practices, lessons learned, and advice on team development initiatives to enhance team effectiveness. Topics will include gaining buy-in from business leaders and stakeholders, navigating team initiatives in a changing business world, measuring outcomes of team initiatives, and further research needed on this topic to support practitioners.

Increasing Transparency in the Candidate Experience While Protecting Your Company

Chase Winterberg, JD, PhD, panelist | 11:30 a.m., room 209

Enhancing the candidate experience continues to be of critical importance to organizations. To remain competitive in the market, organizations must continue to look for ways to increase transparency throughout the hiring process. However, increasing transparency comes with the responsibility to remain standardized and continue to use a science-based approach to prehire assessments. This panel is intended for introductory to advanced practitioners looking to implement transparent communications and feedback to applicants to elevate the candidate experience.

When Values Align: The Attraction-Selection-Attrition Model Using Machine Learning

Alise Dabdoub, PhD, presenter; Sara Stegemoller, coauthor; Matt Lemming, MA, coauthor | 12:30 p.m., Exhibit Hall

The attraction-selection-attraction model posits that individuals are attracted to, selected by, and stay in organizations that espouse values that align with their own. This multiclass classification study used linear discriminant analysis to examine whether core values could be used to predict the organization or job family an employee belonged to. Findings reveal that core values may be more relevant at the organization level than at the job family level, as prediction accuracy increased above the no-information rate at the organization level but not at job family level.

Advancing Frontiers with AI in IO: Diverse Uses of Natural Language Processing

Weiwen Nie, PhD, presenter | 12:30 p.m., room 304

This symposium will highlight diverse applications of modern natural language processing (NLP) techniques that can innovate organizational processes. Authors demonstrate several examples of how rapidly advancing NLP approaches can be leveraged to facilitate immediate change. NLP provides the opportunity to automate laborious tasks and direct more valid, evidence-based practices. The following IO psychologist’s diverse applications of NLP showcase how it can support job analysis, diversity and inclusion, recruitment and selection, and learning and development.

We are so proud of our presenters and their research. We can’t wait to see you in Boston at SIOP 2023.

Leadership consultants, executive coaches, industrial-organizational psychologists, and artificial intelligence all have the same goal: to help make people better at what they do. Do you agree? Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, chief science officer, and Blake Loepp, PR manager, spoke with Ted Hayes, PhD, a research psychologist in northern Virginia, about the implications of using AI in consulting psychology.

“AI is where the future is, and we are moving into the future. You can’t avoid AI,” Ted said.

Let’s dive into a comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of AI coaching and human coaching respectively, as well as our guest’s advice for coaches.

AI Transformation Is Inevitable

Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning will become part of the fabric of just about every industry, including consulting psychology and leadership coaching. AI will affect our futures—and the outlook is bright. Ted pointed out that effecting successful technological change will draw upon the socioemotional skills of leaders to provide change management and psychological safety. It will also draw upon the expertise of psychologists during a time when every single organizational function is likely to be affected by AI.

Before we start imagining evil AI overlords dictating every minute of our working lives, it’s important to note that humans produce and control the content upon which AI is based. Ted explained AI “creativity” using two terms: generative AI and discriminative AI. Generative AI takes existing content and produces variations, such as ChatGPT inventing a comic book superhero based on Wonder Woman. Discriminative AI is a more predictive tool, which might identify employees who may become high-potential leaders or candidates who merit a second interview.

In the case of discriminative AI, an industry concern is that, while psychologists must follow guidelines, laws, rules, and regulations, AI tools behave the way they’ve been programmed. They don’t have accountability the same way that people do. Instead, AI has guardrails programmed into it by human engineers and data scientists who can choose to limit its access to information and its influence within the organization.

Reiterating that AI is answerable only to its programming, Ted observed, “On the one hand, AI won’t save us from ourselves. On the other hand, it’ll reflect the best of us if that’s how we set up its content, and we are in control of that.”

AI Coaching vs. Human Coaching

In the consulting and coaching realm, AI coaching can offer some benefits that humans cannot. Machines are excellent at providing unrelenting reliability and processing data. In terms of the inability to like or dislike, they lack bias. They can help to train and support leaders and teams with instruction or data analysis. “It could do a lot in terms of developing people—not because it likes people, but because its imperative is to make people better at what they do,” Ted said.

Other benefits are that AI is always awake and accessible. It can’t get tired or distracted. It can learn a lot about you and make recommendations based on the data you provide to it, including how to achieve career goals. The advice is personalized. Even if it can’t contextualize or react to your emotions, it can choose a different option based on your response.

Now, human psychologists, consultants, and coaches currently have and always will have certain advantages over AI. If AI has some tools, a human coach has a wealth of tools, including AI. Humans understand how to leverage those tools relative to client needs.

An AI coach is likely to advise more broadly than a human. A human’s emotions and life experiences will allow greater specificity. Put another way, some scenarios will be so specific that where the AI might rely on data about it, the human has lived it.

Learning to position AI effectively will be a process. “We’re right at the dawn of all this. We just don’t know how good it’s going to get,” said Ted.

The Human Connection

A one-on-one, human-to-human interactive coaching session isn’t possible with an AI-powered coach. Perhaps surprisingly, however, there are some positives to coaching without the human connection. First, AI is without emotion, so how it feels about you cannot affect how it behaves. Second, AI cannot decide to lie to you because it has no metacognition. It is also superior to humans in its capacity to process information as an analytical function and to present information as a pedagogical function.

On the other hand, there are drawbacks to losing that human connection. One drawback is that data are messy, and AI using messy data might discriminate or generate racist, sexist, or homophobic responses. AI-powered systems require constant vigilance to achieve positive outcomes, and this need for oversight can be a downside.

Another drawback to AI coaching is the very absence of emotion. People tend to humanize machines. An AI coach or assistant, however, simply cannot answer many of the questions we might ask it. It could rate the pros and cons of a decision, but it can’t always know what is right.

Data privacy is another negative association with using AI tools. If an AI system construed personality information from an interview, for example, then it would be essential for the human to know how those data might be used for selection. An AI that collects information about organizational citizenship across platforms over time is another potentially privacy-violating example.

The human connection remains essential. Assessment feedback from a coach or psychologist trained in dealing with people and organizations will necessarily be superior to that provided by an AI. An AI system only knows what’s in its database. It can’t notice a reaction from a person and couch information in a certain way to be supportive because it cannot care. “Humans still have the upper hand, especially psychologists, in leveraging their expertise relative to what an AI system can do in terms of working with people,” said Ted.

Advice for Coaches

Ted suggested how coaches and consultants should respond to new technologies with a mindset focused on those they support.

• Challenge your thinking about how to partner with AI in your journey as a consultant, psychologist, or coach. Choose to learn about ways to apply AI.
• Understand the ethical implications of working with AI systems in assessment and leadership development.
• Imagine how you would function inside an organization that valued human behavior enough to understand it through an AI platform.
• Add value to the individuals in organizations and societies that choose to build out their AI function.

“I understand the reasons to be pessimistic, but I don’t share them,” Ted concluded. “We can avoid issues like not accounting for algorithmic bias, for not treating people with dignity and respect as they deal with an AI system, for not understanding the possible environmental consequences of having an AI-based system. Because we are accountable, we can do that, and that sets us apart.”

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 71 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

The decision to change your behavior based on personality assessment results is hard. Arriving at that choice requires a leader to have an open mindset, strategic self-awareness, and Hogan coaching. Hogan practitioners who hold feedback sessions and ongoing development discussions need to understand how to predict feedback resistance and guide leaders past it to receptivity. Their conversations about behavioral change must be collaborative and empowering to address feedback resistance and compartmentalization.

By understanding characteristics that might dispose people to feedback resistance, Hogan practitioners can strategically direct a feedback session toward a positive outcome. Our earlier blog post about predicting feedback resistance discussed scale scores that can help practitioners anticipate the likelihood of feedback resistance when they are interpreting results. During a debrief or ongoing development conversation, a practitioner needs insights and strategies for overcoming feedback resistance as it may occur.

Read on to learn ways to turn resistance into receptivity.

How to Overcome Feedback Resistance

How can Hogan practitioners help developing leaders move from resistance to receptivity? Arlene Pace Green, PhD, principal and founder at Enelra Talent Solutions and member of the Hogan Coaching Network, provided insight and advice for overcoming feedback resistance.

Set Expectations

Even before meeting with the leader, it is wise to set expectations for what the session is intended to achieve. People who have never been coached before might have incorrect assumptions about the purpose or scope of development. Because many organizations provide coaching for leaders who are in or will be in role transition, acknowledging changes in circumstances is a good way to begin discussing change and adaptation. Leaders may be less likely to resist developmental change if they perceive it as a positive association with their new role.

Dr. Green often uses a questionnaire before her first session with a leader to help set expectations as well. Some of the questions concern reputation, values, career objectives, and even life goals. The self-reflective mindset helps leaders recognize that coaching is about them and for them, which can excite their curiosity and minimize resistance.

Get Buy-In

During a feedback session, it is important for Hogan practitioners to find a hook to capture the interest of the leader. The hook is the answer to the question “What’s in it for me?” from the leader’s perspective. A leader’s openness to receiving feedback is enhanced when they recognize the value of the process.¹

Dr. Green suggested looking at their Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) results for the hook. “You have to connect the feedback to their values,” she said. “It has to be something they care about.”

Helping a leader understand how their reputation relates to their values is a key technique in overcoming feedback resistance. A leader who scored high on the Recognition scale may be more willing to address her performance risk of lack of focus (high Imaginative) if she believes that she might be distracting her team from gaining a high company ranking. A leader who scored high on the Affiliation scale may be more willing to acknowledge his overused strength of self-promotion (high Colorful) if he realizes he could be creating resentment among his peers.

In addition to values, another motivation that practitioners can use to overcome feedback resistance is the influence of stakeholders like bosses, clients, or teams. A leader who tends to withdraw in social situations (high Reserved) might decide to prioritize socioemotional skills if she realizes that her clients want her to participate actively in their network.

When giving feedback, especially about the performance risks in the Hogan Development Survey (HDS), address elevations in the context of impact on performance. If a leader is unaware of or in denial about performance impact, buy-in is especially necessary to encourage the leader to receive developmental feedback about minimizing negative performance implications.²

Avoid Derailment During Sessions

Dr. Green recommended using a strategic structure for the feedback session to place developmental feedback in context. She gives an overview of the assessments and then discusses results from the MVPI, the HPI, and the HDS, in that order. “I tell them that the assessments show what they want, what will get them there, and what could hold them back,” Dr. Green said. This framework places the leader and their motivations at the center of the conversation.

To lessen the possibility of derailment during a feedback session, Hogan practitioners should establish an atmosphere of collaboration and openness. According to Robert and Joyce Hogan, PhD, our founders, and Rob Kaiser, president of Kaiser Leadership Solutions, “Derailed [leaders] are often self-absorbed, unwilling to take responsibility for their shortcomings, and unable to learn from their mistakes—factors that make them resistant to performance enhancement.”³ Whether or not a leader is disposed to resist feedback, it is good practice for practitioners to be prepared to respond to signs of derailment during a session.

When debriefing assessment results, practitioners should be sensitive to verbal and nonverbal cues that a leader is disengaged, ambivalent, or defensive. As a best practice for delivering Hogan feedback, a practitioner should neither overreact nor underreact to feedback resistance. Resistance likely reflects a gap between the leader’s identity and their reputation.

One excellent strategy for addressing resistance during a session is the PAUSE method: (P) point out the resisting behavior you have observed, (A) ask the person to explore the reaction using neutral language, (U) understand and acknowledge what the person is saying, (S) suggest a new focus or reframe the feedback, and (E) exercise judgment about when to explore further or move on. Asking questions that provoke reflection and approaching the conversation without judgment will help defuse strong emotions.

Create a Meaningful Development Plan

Development isn’t just about helping to mitigate derailment, but it’s also about helping people to learn to leverage their strengths. As Dr. Robert Hogan wrote, “Development consists of adding behaviors or skills to one’s repertoire as the skills become necessary.”⁴ A meaningful development plan is one that outlines actionable short-term objectives that serve a leader’s overarching, long-term professional goals.

A skilled Hogan coach can help maximize development outcomes by helping the leader understand assessment insights in the context of their job and the impact their reputation has on their performance. Ongoing development for leaders means support from a coach while the leader practices new adaptive behavioral skills. An investment in ongoing coaching also allows the coach to monitor the leader’s progress over time and adjust the development plan as needed.

The leader-coach relationship also influences how resistant or receptive leaders are to feedback over time. Successful coaching relies significantly on rapport. A study of executive coaching outcomes found that “eighty-four percent of participants identified the quality of the relationship between executive and coach as critical to the success of the coaching.”⁵ Feedback resistance fades and disappears when leaders see how much coaches care about their success.

Acknowledge Personal Lives and Challenges

Don’t take feedback resistance personally.

Occupational development is the purpose of professional coaching, but this often overlaps with personal development. Strategic self-awareness necessarily touches upon a leader’s personal life too. Feedback resistance might have nothing to do with work at all. Perhaps the leader is worried about the political situation in their home country, or an injury has kept them away from their habitual exercise routine for months. It’s impossible to always know all the circumstances or challenges that might contribute to feedback resistance.

Keep a positive perspective, even in the face of resistance. Development is hard and often requires a concert of factors working together before a leader will express sincere interest in implementing behavioral change.¹

References

1. Warrenfeltz, R, & Kellett, T. (2016). Coaching the Dark Side of Personality. Hogan Press.
2. Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Warrenfeltz, R. (2007). The Hogan Guide: Interpretation and Use of Hogan Inventories. Hogan Press.
3. Hogan, J., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2011). Management Derailment. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 3. (pp. 555–575). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12171-015
4. Hogan, R., & Warrenfeltz, R. (2003). Educating the Modern Manager. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2003.9324043
5. McGovern, J., Lindemann, M., Vergara, M., Murphy, S., Barker, L., & Warrenfeltz, R. (2001). Maximizing the Impact of Executive Coaching: Behavioral Change, Organizational Outcomes, and Return on Investment. The Manchester Review 6(1), 3–11.

One leadership skillset concerns advancing into positions of authority and getting to the top of organizations. At Hogan, we call this emergent leadership. A separate skillset concerns leading those organizations to success. We call this effective leadership.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, chief science officer, and Blake Loepp, PR manager, discussed the core issue of the difference between leadership emergence and leadership effectiveness.

“Leaders who know when to go with their strengths but also know when their strengths lead them in the wrong direction—those are the leaders who are the most effective,” said Ryne.

Let’s dive into this conversation about what makes an effective leader.

What’s the Difference Between Leadership Emergence and Leadership Effectiveness?

Finding numerous studies of leadership in academic literature isn’t hard. Leadership as a topic is in high demand—any bookstore is filled with leadership books. Both academic and popular writing on leadership, however, fail to distinguish between these two key topics of emergence and effectiveness. They hold the common assumption that if you are a leader in an organization, you must, by definition, be effective. But reality proves that many organizations are led ineffectively. Having a leadership role and being a good leader just aren’t the same.

• Leadership emergence – In Hogan terms, emergent leaders get into leadership positions. They belong to the C-suite, or they hold board positions. They climb the corporate ladder, so to speak.
• Leadership effectiveness – Effective leaders build high-performing teams. They can create and maintain a team that produces results. An effective leader is judged by the success of the team’s accomplishments.

Studying leadership emergence isn’t too difficult. If you survey the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, you’ll find that most leaders are men named John who have strong political skills. Studying leadership effectiveness is much more difficult. Team results are hard to quantify because more than just the leader is involved in what makes a team successful in an organizational context.

Compared to the average leadership memoir or academic study, what we think about leadership at Hogan sounds quite different. “It’s about leading organizations to success,” said Ryne.

Personality and Leadership

Personality data are quite predictive of who becomes an emergent leader but are much less definite about who becomes an effective leader.

Personality and the Emergent Leader

In terms of the Big Five or the five-factor model, there is strong metanalytic evidence for who tends to become an emergent leader or who gains status in an organization. Broadly, this person has high emotional stability, high extraversion, high openness to experience, and high conscientiousness. Agreeableness was unrelated to getting into leadership positions.

“When you combine the Big Five personality traits, we see a strong prediction of who’s going to become a leader. Personality predicts leadership emergence really well,” Ryne said.

Personality and the Effective Leader

Leadership effectiveness is, as we said, difficult to measure. Objective data, such as stock market value, are influenced by many factors other than organizational leadership. Intangible characteristics, such as integrity, business competence, good judgment, and vision, are related to personality but aren’t quite the same thing.

What constitutes good criteria for determining leadership effectiveness?

Hogan and Kaiser Leadership Solutions, one of our solutions partners, studied thousands of top leaders in the US and Europe using 360-degree feedback data. The leaders were rated on a single item of overall effectiveness by their subordinates, peers, and supervisors (if they had any). “It’s just simply from one to 10, how effective is this person as a leader?” Ryne explained. “If people who know you and work with you on a daily basis say you’re effective, then that probably means you’re effective.”

Ryne said he was stunned by the unexpected results. The data showed that personality is only weakly related to leadership effectiveness . . . but that’s only half the interpretation.

Personality data predicts behavior extremely well. It predicts if you’re likely to be too forceful, too demanding, too enabling, too strategic, too operational—it predicts leadership ineffectiveness. “Personality is much better at predicting the ways leaders go wrong than the ways they go right,” Ryne said.

Leadership effectiveness isn’t necessarily about having specific personality characteristics but about balancing those different behaviors. In other words, it’s about versatility. Ryne continued: “Effective leaders are versatile leaders. To be a versatile leader, you have to adapt your behavior. You can’t just stick to one strategy all the time.”

There is no one, single personality profile for leadership effectiveness because leaders who cannot or do not adapt their behavior aren’t effective. Versatility is the key, not the ability to focus on operational details or to push for results. Knowing how to adapt to the situation, including when to act against your natural tendencies, is what makes leaders effective. At Hogan, we call this strategic self-awareness.

How to Find Effective Leaders

Effective leaders understand their strengths, weaknesses, and behavioral tendencies. These leaders have the strategic self-awareness first to know when their usual mode of behavior is less advantageous and then to self-correct. Based on past experiences that challenged their natural inclinations, they can leverage adaptive behavioral skills to be tactical when they need to be tactical and strategic when they need to be strategic.

If someone is a strong operational leader, for example, they have likely gained a role where their organizational skills, compliance, process focus, and conscientiousness about details and rules have paid off for them and their teams. In some circumstances, though, it would benefit them, their team, and their organization if they emphasized strategy and adopted a long-term focus. An effective leader knows when that shift is required and brings contextual balance by adapting their behavior and relying on the strengths of others.

How should organizations go about choosing their leaders, then?

Be wary of charisma, which is predictive of leadership emergence. The most obvious candidate for a leadership position may be able to bring strategic vision but fall short on effective leadership. Don’t place too much emphasis on emergent characteristics like political aptitude.

Use assessments to determine alignment between a person’s strengths and weaknesses as a leader and the current organizational needs. Consider the right characteristics and skills to help you solve problems in the short term and grow in the long term. Finally, consider which people can adapt and flex when the situation calls for it.

Look for future leaders from within. High-potential leaders are people who understand the business well, have a history of good judgment, and are trusted by their teams and peers. They are people others are willing to follow. “I wouldn’t be looking for a particular personality profile,” Ryne said. “I would be saying, ‘Given your individual personality profile, how can I develop you personally to be more effective as we move you into a leadership role?’”

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 70 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

Japan is known for its rich and unique culture. Group harmony (wa), private mind (honne) and public mind (tatemae), and intuition through contemplation (Zen) are some of the core concepts underlying Japanese culture. We also find distinctive HR practices and trends leadership emergence in Japan.

Lifetime employment (shūshin koyō) has traditionally been the foundation of Japanese organizations’ HR systems. Many companies in Japan hire new graduates and employ them until they retire. Organizations provide training support throughout employees’ lifetime careers, as well as cross-functional job rotation opportunities to key talent. This helps people broaden their skillsets and experience in different positions across the company.

Employee retention in Japan has traditionally been quite high, and employees look internally for promotion opportunities. Japanese employees may also expect their organizations to take good care of them and advance their careers if they follow the companies’ policies and procedures. This contrasts with other countries and markets such as the United States, for example, where employees believe they are personally responsible for their career progression and success.

Japanese business leaders have a unique style of leadership that creates different expectations for employees than what may be expected from business leaders in American, European, and other Asian markets. In the US, leaders may tend to exhibit stronger individual drive and push their teams for ambitious results, whereas leaders in Japan are expected to exhibit effective team coordination skills. They also may focus more on consensus building with other leaders and ensuring peace and order with their teammates, rather than competing and driving for results. Charisma, overconfidence, and self-promotion are almost necessary for leaders to get noticed and promoted in the US, but in Japan, these characteristics are frowned upon and could be perceived as a threat to the achievement of collective goals and harmony.

Hogan has been working with distributors in Japan since 2013 to offer assessments and select reports in Japanese to the local market. Over the years, we have collected extensive data on leadership in Japan. Based on a sample of more than 3,000 Japanese leaders, our findings paint a unique portrait of leadership emergence in Japan.

What Do Japanese Leaders Want?

Hogan’s Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) measures the core goals, values, drivers, and interests that determine what people desire and strive to attain. Japanese leaders score, on average, lower on the MVPI Power and Recognition scales. This shows that Japanese leaders value noncompetitive work environments where decision-making, responsibility, and credit are shared collectively rather than spotlighted on a few individuals. On one hand, low scores on MVPI’s Recognition scale suggest leaders may value humility and being low-key about their accomplishments. Leaders with low results on the Recognition scale may not prioritize offering verbal praise or celebrating accomplishments. On the other hand, low scores on the MVPI Power scale indicate Japanese leaders may value a participative and a democratic decision-making style by seeking feedback and input from others.

Japanese leaders also score, on average, lower on the Tradition scale. This suggests they may value flexibility and fluidity in how decisions are made and things are done, as well as a focus on progress and modernity. Interestingly, these trends in personality traits are consistent with the Japanese Zen culture, which emphasizes impermanence, transience, and mindfulness.

How Will Leaders in Japan Get What They Want?

The Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI) measures how we relate to others when we are at our best. It provides valuable insight into how people work, how they lead, and how they achieve success. Japanese leaders tend to score, on average, lower on the HPI Ambition scale, indicating they are supportive, team oriented, and have a flexible agenda to accommodate team, peer, and superior opinions. They may shy away from pressuring direct reports and may avoid engaging in unnecessary rivalries and quarrels with colleagues. In line with the concept of wa, Japanese leaders are expected to promote group harmony, and Japan’s culture tends to promote low scores on HPI’s Ambition scale. This trend is particularly interesting, as we observe that leaders in other markets around the world, such as the US for example, tend to score higher on the HPI Ambition scale.

Japanese leaders also tend to score lower on the HPI’s Learning Approach scale. Leaders who score low on this scale tend to have a pragmatic and purpose-driven approach to learning. They are unlikely to get distracted by extraneous readings or training that is peripheral to what helps them solve problems. Instead, they will prefer to use only what will help them get their work done. We can see how this plays out with Japanese companies tending to foster experiential learning through on-the-job training and job rotation across different functions.

What Will Get in Japanese Leaders’ Way?

The Hogan Development Survey (HDS) measures overused strengths that emerge in times of increased strain, pressure, or boredom. If not managed, these qualities can damage one’s reputation and relationships, derailing one’s career and success. Japanese leaders tend to score higher on the HDS’s Moving Away cluster, especially on the Cautious scale. Leaders that display this pattern are known as careful, thorough, independent, and objective, which facilitates developing root-cause solutions. However, they may tend to shy away from problems, rather than confront them head-on. This may lead others to perceive them as inhibited, aloof, or cold, as well as indecisive and risk averse.

Because Japanese leaders may tend to first build consensus on (a) whether a problem exists, then (b) determining how to solve that problem, these leaders may find themselves naturally sticking to their solutions and decisions. However, under stress, Japanese leaders may easily fall into overanalysis or overreliance on consensus. For fear of being criticized by their peers or superiors, Japanese leaders may feel the need to review all available data, ask for second and third opinions, and gain alignment with all decision-making parties prior to finally making a decision. Instead of sharing their dissatisfaction, unpopular opinions, or worries with others, thereby causing disharmony, these leaders may instead withdraw, feel resentful and disappointed, and deal with these difficult emotions on their own. We find this is consistent with the concepts of honne (i.e., a person’s true feelings and desires) versus tatemae (i.e., the behavior and opinions one displays in public).

What Can We Learn from Japanese Leaders’ Personality Data?

The unique trends of leadership emergence in Japan that we observe in our personality data can offer a deeper understanding of expectations the Japanese workforce may have for leaders. Using personality provides us with a more nuanced and workforce-oriented explanation for the “cultural” differences we see in leadership styles. If we know that Japanese leaders tend to drive purposeful innovation, focus on rigorous problem-solving, and go about this through strong consensus building, we can adapt the ways we interact to plan, strategize, communicate, and lead more effectively.

The average trends we describe are indicative of the emergent leadership style of Japanese leaders. However, the emergent leadership style we see occurring is not necessarily the most effective style of leadership. Indeed, it is imperative to differentiate between leadership emergence and leadership effectiveness in Japan. Although Japanese leaders tend to score lower on average on Ambition, higher Ambition scores still predict effectiveness in Japanese leaders. Given the context of the lower Ambition leadership landscape in Japan, however, this energy and drive to succeed must be channeled toward team building and pursuing collective goals. We may conclude that effective Japanese leaders successfully balance getting ahead and getting along.

This blog post was authored by Anne-Marie Paiement, PhD, senior consultant, and Krista Pederson, managing director of Asia-Pacific business development.

Personality plays a role in developing and maintaining a safe workplace environment. It can predict safe behavior and even save lives. But how?

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, and Blake Loepp spoke with Zsolt Feher, managing director of Hogan’s International Distributors Network, about personality and safety.

Every time there is a specific repetitive task for an employee to follow, safety can become an issue.

Let’s dive right into this conversation about how personality assessment impacts safety culture.

Why Safety Matters

Safety should be a concern for all organizations. In some industries, safety can be a matter of life and death. Oil and gas, mining, utilities, transportation, shipping, manufacturing, healthcare, and even the film industry are susceptible to safety-related accidents.

Zsolt referenced a large metropolitan transportation company that had better safety statistics and fewer compensation claims for traffic violations after using Hogan’s assessments. The company saw fewer accidents and fewer customer complaints. Customer satisfaction can be a positive side effect of a strong safety culture.

Often, organizations seek Hogan’s help with safety after accidents have happened. “When a company says that they tried basically everything, this is when we suggest a focus on personality assessment,” Zsolt said. In addition to training, equipment, and rules and regulations, assessment should become another pillar of the safety culture of an organization.

Accidents cost money, and—more importantly—can cost lives. Hogan helps to identify individuals who are safety prone versus accident prone. “At the end of the day, we’re talking about life,” Zsolt said. “It’s a serious and important contribution what we can do for organizations.”

Six Safety Competencies

Safety isn’t only about getting safety-conscious people into the right positions. It’s also about identifying potential safety risks in individual contributors so they can be aware of areas where they need to be careful.

The Hogan Safety report measures six components of safety-related behavior.

Compliant

The Compliant scale concerns conforming to organizational guidelines. Too often, accidents result from human error when humans don’t attend to details or follow rules. Zsolt referenced human error in the Chernobyl disaster as an example of why compliance is so essential.

Strong

The Strong scale concerns resilience under pressure and confidence in one’s work. Someone who manages stress and adapts to changing work will be a safer worker than someone who panics under pressure. Composure and stress management matter when making split-second decisions that can affect lives.

Poised

The Poised scale concerns emotional stability and seeming relaxed, calm, and phlegmatic. Mood management affects working relationships. This speaks to the ability to keep control of one’s anger or irritability in high-pressure environments.

Vigilant

The Vigilant scale concerns staying focused and not being easily distracted. Those who have a high tolerance for repetitive tasks can remain attentive and accurate. Distractibility can be dangerous during times of monotony.

Cautious

The Cautious scale contrasts risk taking with risk aversion. Zsolt said, “Most of the time, it’s human errors, human risk, so everybody has to be cautious.” He mentioned a disaster in which a ship captain chose to disregard warning alerts because of supposed familiarity with the area.

Trainable

The Trainable scale concerns a willingness to accept training. Listening to feedback and being open to implement changes or take action to improve safety is key. This also includes being sensitive to warning signs that safety may be compromised. People with high trainability also tend to be willing to educate others.

These six behaviors in this safety model apply to so many industries where physical safety can be jeopardized. Beyond preventing injury or fatality, these safety competencies can contribute to a safety culture through their residual effects, such as risk aversion, training others, and emotional awareness. They also, of course, save money by avoiding costly accidents that can have serious safety outcomes.

A Case Study in Safety

“The number-one priority is that we are saving lives here. Let me underline that several times,” said Zsolt. The ROI for investing in personality assessment for safety can be more than 5,000%. The direct and indirect savings and the lasting positive side effects are also important benefits—not to mention the lives saved.

Zsolt shared a story about a German utility company. Over a decade ago, the company sought help from Hogan after experiencing 11 deadly accidents on an annual basis. Engineers and repair personnel worked on a high-voltage grid, and mistakes were often fatal. After bringing in industry experts, rewriting the training booklet, investing in training activities, purchasing state-of-the-art equipment, and updating the rules and regulations, they continued to experience accidental deaths year after year.

Hogan entered the project with the standpoint of saving people. “Let’s develop people in this organization. Let’s make them understand why they are potentially in danger,” Zsolt said. Hogan administered assessments and provided individual feedback for those whose overall safety scores were at the low end. Many of the individuals had never had a one-on-one feedback session with someone who listened to their concerns and cared about improving their safety.

Giving personal feedback was important in this situation. The participants were often astonished at the accuracy of the assessments. Hogan helped to identify issues with rule compliance (people using personal equipment instead of official equipment) and openness to feedback (people who skipped training or didn’t apply any learning).

The organization used a system of grouping either two or four individuals in a pair or cohort. Distributing safety competencies within the group was very important, especially the Trainable competency. The organization also placed high priority on the Strong competency and tailored its educational programs to emphasize techniques for stress management.

“The year after we finished the project, there were zero deadly accidents happening. We went down from 11 to zero in this company,” Zsolt said. He added that the company still uses the Hogan Safety report today to minimize risk and ensure safety.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 69 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

Last week, Hogan Assessments had a productive and busy visit to Tokyo, working alongside Optimal Consulting Group and Persol Research and Consulting Co. Ltd., our long-standing distributors for Hogan in Japan. It had been three years since our last in-person visit, and this trip was filled successfully with client and public thought leadership events, as well as business development meetings.

Our founder and president, Robert Hogan, PhD, spoke on “Rethinking Leadership,” Wendy Howell Hogan shared “Why Leadership Development Is Broken and How to Fix It,” and Zsolt Feher and Krista Pederson spoke on “Judgment,” “Global HR Trends,” and “Coaching the Dark Side with Japanese Characteristics.” Anne-Marie Paiement, PhD, supported and shared research on trends in Japanese leaders’ personalities, which clients found relevant to further implementing Hogan in their practices. These topics sparked plenty of questions and interactions with attendees, demonstrating Hogan’s expertise in cross-cultural leadership selection and development.

Tokyo is famous for its incredible food scene, and we took this wonderful opportunity to spend quality time and connect further with our trusted distributors. True to Hogan’s fun-loving culture, we had some wonderful sushi and modern French cuisine to recognize and acknowledge everyone’s hard work.

We look forward to continued collaboration and growth in Japan. Arigato gozaimasu for everyone’s efforts in making this trip a success! 

You’re giving feedback during a debrief, and suddenly the leader goes quiet. You can feel the rapport evaporate. This unpredictable shift caught you by surprise, and you wish you could have anticipated it in preparing for the feedback session. Predicting feedback resistance is not impossible, however, with all the Hogan personality data you have at your fingertips.

Hogan practitioners can successfully navigate feedback sessions and ongoing development discussions with leaders who compartmentalize or resist feedback, turning resistance into receptivity. Practitioners need to be aware of the likelihood of feedback resistance while interpreting results and during the session itself. By understanding the characteristics that might dispose people to resist feedback, practitioners can purposefully direct a feedback session toward a positive and empowering outcome: helping leaders cultivate strategic self-awareness and behavioral modification strategies to improve their performance.

In this article, we will cover five types of feedback resistance. The hostile, defensive, arrogant, and indifferent feedback resistance types all tend to be individual, while the fifth type, cultural, emerges from the organizational environment. Our next article about feedback will cover strategies for overcoming feedback resistance.

Let’s dive right in.

Types of Feedback Resistance

Certain scores or scale combinations on the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) might point to a likelihood of feedback resistance. For instance, someone who scores moderate (70%–89%) or high (90%–100%) on the HDS Cautious scale may resist change in how they work. By no means does this imply that every person with a high Cautious score will seem defensive during feedback or development. It does, however, indicate that a Hogan practitioner should deliver feedback mindfully, taking care to ask questions and demonstrate openness.

Note that the following overview of types of feedback resistance is not exhaustive. Neither are the scale scores we highlight for each type. Remember, feedback resistance is as unique and complex as each personality.

Hostile

Someone who offers hostile feedback resistance may have some combination of these scale scores: low Ambition (HPI), high Excitable (HDS), high Skeptical (HDS), and low Altruistic (MVPI).

Negative performance implications associated with low Ambition are lack of vision, energy, and drive, and lower confidence, which may cause them to view change as too hard. High Excitable is associated with moodiness, feeling easily frustrated and disappointed, emotional volatility, and being prone to quit in frustration. Someone with a high Skeptical score may take criticism personally and seem tense, upset, or angry. A person who scores low on the Altruistic scale can be perceived as tough, assertive, forceful, outspoken, and willing to confront problems.

Depending on the unique circumstances of a feedback session—up to and including the leader’s momentary frame of mind—hostile resistance might manifest as argumentation, emotional outbursts, or rejection.

Defensive

Defensive feedback resistance might be more likely in a leader who has some combination of these scale scores: low Adjustment (HPI), low Interpersonal Sensitivity (HPI), low Learning Approach (HPI), high Excitable, high Skeptical, and high Science (MVPI).

Someone who scores low on the Adjustment scale, while generally responsive to coaching and feedback, might seem overly self-critical, stress-prone, and anxious. Negative performance implications of low Interpersonal Sensitivity are criticism and skepticism. A low Learning Approach score may indicate an intolerance of development and a belief that traditional or non-skills-based learning is unpleasant or unhelpful. High Skeptical and high Science scores together could suggest someone who is suspicious about or mistrustful of claims not backed up by objective, verifiable data.

Defensive feedback resistance likely stems from negative beliefs about the reliability, purpose, or usefulness of development and may emerge in self-deprecation, anxiety, or doubt.

Arrogant

People who exhibit arrogant feedback resistance may have some combination of these scale scores: high Sociability (HPI), high Learning Approach, low Cautious, high Colorful (HDS), and high Recognition (MVPI).

A high Sociability scale score is associated with attention-seeking behavior and competition for the center stage. A high Learning Approach scale score is associated with valuing learning above doing and seeming like a know-it-all. Someone with a low Cautious score is likely to seem comfortable with risk and nonchalant about making mistakes. A high Colorful score may indicate someone who seems self-promoting, overcommitted, easily angered, and quickly bored. A leader with a high Recognition score probably values attention and public acknowledgement and may be described by others as seeming self-important or conceited.

Arrogant feedback resistance may emerge as a disbelief in or denial of the need for change and an attempt to preserve an inflated self-image by using performance, authority, or charm.

Indifferent

Indifferent feedback resistance may appear in someone who has some combination of these scale scores: average or high Adjustment, high Skeptical, high Reserved (HDS), high Leisurely (HDS), and high Imaginative (HDS).

Someone with average Adjustment might seem nonchalant about work, whereas someone with high Adjustment might tend to discount or ignore negative feedback because of strong self-confidence. A person scoring high on the Skeptical scale may seem indifferent to feedback because they are unpersuaded that change is necessary. Negative performance implications of high Reserved scores include interpersonal insensitivity, self-absorption, distant or absent communication, and disinterest in matters perceived as unrelated or unimportant. A person with a high Leisurely score could exhibit passive-resistant behavior by appearing neutral or agreeable but feeling resentful and ignoring feedback. A high Imaginative leader may discount others’ opinions and behave in an eccentric, distractable, or preoccupied manner.

Indifferent feedback resistance in a leader may resemble a lack of enthusiasm, withdrawal, unresponsiveness, distraction, or boredom, and it may also conceal other emotions.

Cultural

In a workplace environment in which individual growth and change are not celebrated, feedback resistance or compartmentalization may be more likely to occur. This may appear in an environment characterized by some combination of these values: low Power (MVPI), low Altruistic, high Tradition (MVPI), and high Security (MVPI).

A culture with low Power values would be unlikely to reward growth and challenge or display interest in achievement. Negative cultural implications of low Altruistic are an emphasis on personal responsibility and self-reliance to the degree that support or resources for development are lacking. A high Tradition culture is comfortable with established procedure and consequently tends to be resistant to change. A high Security culture will tend to favor rules and conformity and resist ambiguity, risk, performance appraisal, and innovation.

Cultural feedback resistance might appear as a lack of support for development or change and a fear of risk or failure.

Getting to Feedback Receptivity

Keep in mind that, for some scales such as Adjustment or Learning Approach, feedback resistance might be a behavior that can emerge with more than one score range. Low Adjustment could be a factor in feedback resistance in one leader, but so could high Adjustment in another. As always, individual self-awareness, the context for development, and scale combinations influence how feedback resistance might appear. After predicting the likelihood and type of feedback resistance that the leader might exhibit, a Hogan practitioner can strategize the best ways to minimize that resistance during a feedback session.

When we perceive and appreciate the everyday personality strengths, potential derailers, and the motives, values, and preferences that underlie individuals’ actions and choices, we gain a more complete picture of how to enable their success.

Look out for our upcoming blog about techniques for overcoming feedback resistance to learn how to personalize feedback to empower leaders.