Good empirical studies examining coaching and development are always hard to find. But here two from Q1 we thought coaches might enjoy:

• In an effort to determine what influences a client’s perception of coaching effectiveness, de Haan et al. examined a number of potential factors using data from over 150 client-coach pairs. They found the perceived quality of the client-coach relationship, or working alliance, was most critical in determining how clients perceive coaching effectiveness.
• Do you know someone who is dealing with emotional exhaustion or low job satisfaction? If so, research conducted by Hulsheger et al. on the effects of mindfulness might be the answer. In general, employees who are attentive to and accepting of what is going on around them are generally more satisfied with their jobs. The article provides a brief review of and references to additional information concerning mindfulness training.

Below are a few recent articles covering topics related to methods and statistics. Enjoy.

• Do you need more evidence indicating that delivery method (e.g., paper and pencil v. internet) does not impact results? If so, recent work by Weigold et al. not only supports previous research finding that both methods produce equivalent results, but provides a nice outline of potential problems with studies that have failed to find equivalence.
• Are you trying to figure out how to increase survey response rates?  Research by Fauth et al. shows you might be up against than you realize. Aside from job satisfaction, several group-level variables, such as work group size, heterogeneity in tenure, and heterogeneity in gender, significantly influence response rates. One positive takeaway is social influences likely matter, so, when trying to increase participation, peer pressure may help.
• On the statistics front, coefficient alpha continues to be the most widely used reliability estimate. For that reason, it is also probably the most widely criticized. Peterson & Kim examined differences between alpha and a popular alternative, composite reliability. Across thousands of estimates, they found that the average estimates from the two approaches differed by only .02. Based on these results, there is no reason to assume that coefficient alpha won’t continue to rain as the king of reliability estimates in I/O Psychology.

Next up, Part 3 of our review will cover a diverse range of articles we thought were worth sharing. And in case you missed it, be sure to check out Part 1 of our review, which summarized articles dealing with a variety of factors that drive performance in organizations. Again, we invite you to provide information relating to any other articles from the first three months of 2013 that we failed to include here.

The Upside of Narcissism in the Workplace

No one has time to read every new piece of research that could impact our field. As a result, it is hard to know what important new findings might pass us by. Luckily, the Hogan Research Division is here to help (and we welcome your contributions in return).

Below is a quick rundown of several articles from Q1 that examined a variety of individual and organizational characteristics that drive performance. This is not an all-inclusive list. So, if you’ve read any new publications or reports from the last three months we failed to include, feel free to write a comment telling us about them.

• In a review of customer service-related variables, Hong et al. provide a nice outline of how leadership impacts a company’s bottom line. First, leadership practices shape an organization’s service climate, which influences employee behaviors. Behaviors impact customer satisfaction, which then drives financial performance. This research provides an excellent demonstration of the Leadership Value Chain at work.
• In reviewing safety-related variables, Hogan & Foster presents research demonstrating how individual employee personality characteristics predict important work outcomes. Using data from multiple samples representing a variety of jobs, organizations, and industries, we show that personality influences safety-related behaviors, which in turn predict major workplace accidents and injuries. In other words, personality doesn’t influence work outcomes by itself, but does so because of its influence in important work-related behaviors.
• We have all heard that self efficacy and performance are correlated with one another, but does one actually cause the other? Research by Sitzmann and Yeo suggests that performance drives self-efficacy, but not necessarily the other way around. Instead, individuals who are confident in their abilities likely do better on many tasks simply because they’ve done well on similar tasks in the past.
• Is conflict within teams good or bad? According to research by Bradley et al., it all depends on the personality characteristics of your team. When team members are generally high in Emotional Stability or Openness, conflict can drive good performance, but the opposite is true when either characteristic is generally low. So, when dealing with conflict within teams, it helps to know your team members.
• Abusive supervision continues to be a hot topic these days. In examining the impact of abusive supervision, Shoss et al. found that when employees identify an abusive supervisor with their company, they are more likely to retaliate against the company itself through both counterproductive behaviors and lower job performance.

And stay tuned, Parts 2 and 3 of our review will cover articles relating to coaching, statistics, and a potpourri selection of articles we thought were worth sharing.

Is there such a thing as being too creative? Although creativity is largely associated with positive work outcomes, our research shows that, in excess, creativity can be a powerful roadblock to career success.

To understand how creativity can harm an individual’s career, we must look at personality from two perspectives: bright-side personality and dark-side personality.

Bright-side personality describes the strengths and weaknesses people display when they are at their best. Dark-side personality describes personality characteristics that are strengths under normal circumstances. Under the increased stress, pressure, or boredom of most work environments, people tend to overuse those strengths, and they can become powerful career derailers.

Creative people often have parents who emphasize their uniqueness and favor creative expression over convention. As adults, their ability to comfortably work outside of societal norms makes creative individuals valuable sources of potentially important ideas. However, highly creative individuals also tend to focus too much on thinking outside the box, often at the cost of their ability to clearly explain their ideas or follow through.

For more on performance implications and recommendations for coaching highly creative individuals, download our white paper, Way Outside the Box.

This axiom is all too relevant for entrepreneurs today. Companies like Google and Pixar embrace a collaborative and innovative culture with unconventional work hours and offices. Why do they go through such great lengths to foster their employees’ creativity? Because that’s what a creative employee’s personality demands.

A creative employee’s personality profile indicates that they’re idealistic, nonconforming, and tend to be unconcerned about money. Conversely, good managers tend to be stable, practical, and concerned with maintaining order and controlling costs.

Although they are psychological opposites, managers and creative people badly need one another.
Find out what 5 steps organizations can take to ensure they are properly managing their creative employees and driving innovation by downloading our complimentary ebook.

Survey results revealed that 82.1% of respondents feel personality
is most important in a romantic partner.

In 1987, Drs. Robert and Joyce Hogan founded a company based on social justice in the workplace. They have since become widely recognized as pioneering authorities in personality assessment, leadership, and organizational effectiveness. Former professors, the Hogans instilled a tradition of academic research and collaboration within their company. The Hogan Research Division (HRD), comprised of doctorate- and master-level Industrial-Organizational Psychology professionals, continues this legacy by working closely with university faculty and students in our Hogan Academic Network.

Each year, HRD collaborates with graduate students and professors around the world on research activities involving Hogan assessments. Hogan is committed to providing ongoing support for student researchers by providing them access to data from the Hogan archive (validation studies on more than 400 job titles and evidence from more than 250 criterion-related validation studies) and the use of Hogan tools to conduct their own research. Several universities use Hogan assessments in their coursework. In addition, students who take our assessments as part of a course often receive developmental feedback from a Hogan Certified Coach.

If you would like more information on our collaborative research efforts, contact us!