Not everybody was meant to be a good people leader. However, that doesn’t mean a person is unable to be a successful manager or leader. Instead, it’s important for organizations to explore validated assessment methods to determine what leadership style employees will display.

Perhaps one employee has a strong analytical leadership style and relies heavily on numbers and information, while another is focused on ideas and strategic problem-solving. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with either style as long as they are identified and managed accordingly.

Last month we launched our new Leader Focus Report, which aims to simplify and provide insight into six leadership dimensions that influence leadership style and effectiveness. In this video, our CEO, Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, discusses these dimensions and how they determine what a leader will focus on and how he or she will define success.

Over and over again, organizations are unable to appoint the right leaders. According to academic estimates, the baseline for effective corporate leadership is merely 30%, while in politics, approval ratings oscillate between 25% and 40%. In America, 75% of employees report that their direct line manager is the worst part of their job, and 65% would happily take a pay cut if they could replace their boss with someone better. A recent McKinsey report suggests that fewer than 30% of organizations are able to find the right C-suite leaders, and that newly appointed executives take too long to adapt.

Although there are many reasons for this bleak state of affairs – including over-reliance on intuition at the expense of scientifically valid selection tools – a common problem is organizations’ inability to predict whether leaders will fit in with their culture. Even when organizations are good at assessing leaders’ talents (e.g., their skills, expertise, and generic leadership capabilities), they forget that an essential element of effective leadership is the congruence between leaders’ values and those of the organization, including the leaders’ team. As a result, too many leaders are (correctly) hired on talent but subsequently fired due to poor culture fit.

In our view, there are three critical errors organizations must fix in order to upgrade their selection efforts, namely:

Decode leaders’ motives and values: While expertise and experience are central to leaders’ potential, they are insufficient to predict leadership performance. In fact, even generic personality characteristics, such as integrity, people skills, curiosity, and self-awareness will fail to predict a leader’s fit to the role or organization. A proper understanding of fit must take into account the leader’s motives and values, also known as the “inside” of personality. Motives and values operate as an inner compass, dictating what the leader will like and reward, the type of culture and climate they will strive to create in their teams, and the activities they will see as meaningful and fulfilling.

For example, leaders who value tradition will have a strong sense of what is right and wrong, will prefer hierarchical organizations, and will have little tolerance of disruption and innovation – put them in a creative environment and they will struggle. On the other hand, leaders who value affiliation will have a strong desire to get along with others, will focus on building and maintaining strong interpersonal relations, and on working collaboratively. This means they will not be engaged if their role is too isolated and the company culture is overly individualistic. Finally, altruistic leaders will strive to improve other people’s lives and drive progress in the world, so they will suffer if their organizations are purely driven by profits and disinterested in having a positive social impact.

Understand their own organizational culture: Knowing a leader’s motives and values is pointless unless organizations are also able to decode their own culture. Sadly, most organizations underestimate the importance of accurately profiling their culture so they end up relying on intuitive and unrealistic ideas that say more about what they would like to be than what they actually are. This is why a large number of companies today describe themselves as “entrepreneurial,” “innovative,” “results-oriented,” or “diverse,” even when their own employees perceive a very different type of culture. Well-designed climate surveys, which crowdsource people’s views and experiences of the organizational culture, are a much better indicator of a company’s true values than the aspirational competencies curated by senior executives.

Be realistic about the new leader’s ability to actually change the culture: Although senior leaders are the main shapers of organizational culture, it is hard for newly appointed leaders to reshape the existing culture. That is not to say that organizations should give up and only hire leaders who are a good fit. In fact, moderate misfits who are charismatic and visionary are a company’s best bet for driving top-down change – but the process will be slow and tedious, and these leaders will need to have a great deal of support in order to persist and prevail. The odds of success will be slim, and some leaders may be so disruptive in their intentions that they may harm morale and productivity, or end up disrupting themselves. As Sartre noted, “only the guy who isn’t rowing has time to rock the boat.”

Of course, some leaders manage to perform well in virtually any context. They are able to flex or span between a range of competing competencies, which makes them more adaptive and versatile, as Rob Kaiser’s compelling research shows – but they are an exception rather than the norm. In contrast, for most people, leadership potential will be somewhat context-dependent, so there is no guarantee that a person will lead effectively just because they have been effective in a previous role or organization. Past performance is a good predictor of future performance only when the context remains the same. When it doesn’t, the focus should be on potential and the future rather than performance and the past.

Want to learn more about hiring the right way? Check out our guide to crafting next-level talent identification, interviewing, and selection processes

This article was co-authored by Hogan CEO Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic and Russell Reynolds Associates CEO Clarke Murphy, and originally appeared in Harvard Business Review.

Academics and businesspeople agree that self-awareness is a key aspect of improving performance. Studies show that without it, people tend to be closed-off to feedback, difficult to coach, overestimate capabilities, and ultimately struggle to build and maintain high performing teams. Conversely, awareness of one’s own behavioral tendencies facilitates leadership effectiveness.

As it’s generally understood that self-awareness is essential for improvement, it might follow that investment in leadership development would result in increased effectiveness. But there is actually a strong negative correlation between spending on development and confidence in leadership, which highlights an unfortunate conclusion: The majority of managers and executives aren’t receiving interventions that move the needle. In fact, at least half of all leaders get in the way of team productivity and don’t live up to their full potential. And, perhaps even more concerning, executive turnover costs organizations somewhere between 50-200% of a leader’s annual salary—thus making it vastly consequential to the bottom line.

Why aren’t interventions changing the behavior of bad leaders and improving financial results? I think it’s because many researchers and practitioners use an individualistic (and inaccurate) definition of self-awareness that emphasizes self-knowledge and strengths over ways to improve one’s reputation with others. From my perspective, the goal of self-knowledge and celebrating yourself is inward looking, antisocial, and selfish—when leadership is a team sport and function for the group, as opposed to a source of personal privilege and individual power.

As an alternative, I propose a more prosocial definition that is congruent with human nature and, by extension, more likely to impact employee engagement and the bottom line. Further, I go on to provide evidence that there are individual differences in self-awareness. That is, some personality characteristics facilitate self-awareness while others, such as being too competitive or overly confident, get in the way of an accurate understanding of what’s going on around us.

The Individualistic Version of Self-Awareness 

Philosophers and psychologists have a long history of being concerned with self-knowledge. As Aristotle put it, “knowing yourself is the beginning of all wisdom.” But the first question is, “What do we mean by self-awareness?”

Historically, psychologists have used an individualistic approach. Individualism suggests that civilization is an alien intrusion and de-emphasizes social bonds, commitments to the majority, and self-control. The positive psychology movement, for example, is rooted in individualistic presuppositions; the major premise is that effective leadership starts with finding the Authentic Self – the real you that is objectively true.

From this paradigm, leadership development is about introspection and self-regulated positive behaviors that foster self-development, well-being, and the ability to cope with daily life. The more you self-control for the benefit of the group, the more you become neurotic and guilt-ridden. Thus, you should just be yourself, focus on what you do best, and act in ways that align with your personal agenda.

Yet, empirical research finds that a strengths-based approach intensifies natural dispositions and influences leaders to neglect opposing but complementary actions. For example, leaders with an inclination to push people toward task performance overdo forceful behaviors and disregard building relationships and creating an environment that cultivates morale and engagement.

In effect, improving your leadership productivity doesn’t actually look like being more of yourself; it looks like the parent who balances imposing structure with acceptance and sensitivity, or the businessperson who dexterously shifts from radical innovation to practical implementation.

Three Motives that Re-Frame Self-Awareness

The alternative to individualism is an evolutionary perspective, namely, socioanalytic theory. Socioanalytic theory integrates findings from biology, sociology, evolutionary psychology, and cultural anthropology to assert three overarching motives which each have a role to play in self-awareness:

1. We all want to get along and achieve harmonious relationships and social attention. For the last 250,000 years as modern humans, 5 million years as chimpanzees, and 7 million years as gorillas, we have lived together in families and troops, respectively. From building pyramids to winning wars, everything consequential in human affairs happens between people – not within people.  We are social creatures motivated to create and maintain relationships with others.
2. We all want to get ahead by obtaining power, status, and resources. People have always organized in hierarchies of inequality. Hierarchies facilitate passing on information to future generations and assist with coordination. It’s much easier to learn how to behave from other people than figuring it out for yourself, and the same goes for which berry to eat, language, reading, and solving math problems.
3. We all want to render life interpretable. People need to feel as though life has meaning, purpose, and predictability – hence the reason for philosophy, religion, scientific exploration, and rules for social interaction, games, and language. People are first and foremost rule-formulating and rule-following animals that impose a culture and its rules on other people (i.e., socialization). Rules help people forecast and understand what will happen next in a chaotic and meaningless world.

Of course, a person may place more or less value on each motive than another person, but nevertheless all three motives are present in everyone.

Rethinking Self-Awareness

A key point in understanding self-awareness and leadership is that these motives are in a state of tension: The more you self-sacrifice, the more people like you; and the more you win, the less people like you. Therefore, one of the fundamental challenges in everyday life (and leadership) is being liked while being promoted or being sensitive while telling people what to do.  People who get it right enjoy more relationships and power than those who get it wrong, and these are the same people who are good at leadership. This point is widely established in the research literature and known as the too-much-of-a-good-thing effect (TMGT) and strengths overused. Balancing the tension and getting it right requires self-awareness.

The situation you’re in is an important variable in determining which behavioral strategies meet your underlying motives and promote good leadership. But because we’re social primates, the situation isn’t mysterious environmental variables guiding our behavior – it’s other people. We spend the majority of every day in social interactions for the purpose of negotiating acceptance and status (the first two motives) and each of these interactions comes with an agenda and roles (agendas and roles are projections of the human need for structure and order, the third motive).

For instance, when you step into a team meeting everyone has a part to play, perhaps one person is giving a presentation and the others are pretending to listen. Each role comes with serious expectations regarding appropriate behavior and people become genuinely upset, emotional, and confused when someone breaks the rules. What if the presenter randomly stops talking or has an emotional outburst? What if an audience member turns around and faces the other direction?

Understanding Self-Awareness

Here’s what happens: After an interaction, people evaluate social performances and assign adjectives based on how well individuals played their parts. Good role performances are assigned positive adjectives; bad role performances, such as a presenter who stops talking or Sean Spicer in a press conference, are assigned negative adjectives and made fun of on Saturday Night Live.

Life is essentially one social interaction after the next to which people evaluate and describe each other. The aggregate of these descriptions is called reputation. For better or worse, it’s an individual’s reputation (not self-concept) that determines how they are treated and whether or not they fit in at work, influence a team, or get promoted to the C-suite.

To be very clear, I am saying that just sitting in your office and thinking about yourself is not helpful in facilitating leadership effectiveness and obtaining shared goals. Extreme individualism feeds the natural human tendency to distort reality in a self-serving way and breeds a culture of internal competition that discounts between-group competition—remember Enron? Consequently, this closed-off focus on the self is quite literally the antithesis of good leadership and what’s best for company financials.

On the other hand, knowing something about your reputation is very useful. What other people think determines your fate and ability (or inability) to engage and rally the troops. Looking to the external world instead of inward helps leaders acquire strategic self-awareness and compensatory behaviors that are in line with role expectations, self-sacrifice, cooperation, and managerial performance. Accordingly, we define self-awareness as the degree to which self-evaluations of behavior match others’ evaluations.

Personality Predicts Self-Awareness

At Hogan, we recently assessed the values and personality of 1,255 managers and executives. These leaders and their supervisors, peers, and subordinates then completed a 360-degree assessment measuring competency behaviors and overall effectiveness. We operationalized self-awareness by subtracting other-ratings of performance from self-ratings and then computed analyses to determine which personality characteristics predict misinterpreting reality.

As socioanalytic theory hypothesizes, leaders who were egocentric, competitive, non-conforming, unemotional, arrogant, focused on the past, closed off to others, and overly serious were unaware of what other people think about them. These characteristics place individual survival above the group and reduce both self-awareness and team and organizational performance.

This is the central challenge in improving organizational effectiveness: Selfish dictators (getting ahead) are the ones who are promoted, but a group of cooperators (getting along) outperform a group of dictators. And what do all dictators have in common? They get noticed and rise to power but are bad at leadership. They are unaware of their lack of competence; and they spend most of their waking hours fantasizing about unique talents and trying to convince others they were sent from the heavens to save the world. But in the end they always lose: Dictatorships are outperformed by a functional culture that encourages cooperation and balances individualism with high standards of moral conduct.

On the contrary, leaders who were self-critical, insecure, curious, humble, and open-minded had a better grasp on others’ perceptions of their behavior and leadership style. This psychological profile is prosocial and orients the individual to the external world. The benefit is a sensible approach to leadership development: They get feedback from the environment, target specific weaknesses, and evaluate whether or not they’ve changed.

Using this approach, leaders are better equipped to navigate the balancing act of getting along and getting ahead, and thus keep friends while emerging as leaders via an aggressive political process. Further, when they do ascend the hierarchy, they resist the corrupting influences of power, see things from other people’s point of view, and set aside the ego to concentrate on firm performance.

Final Thoughts

Self-knowledge is about who you are in relation to other people and, therefore, self-awareness should be defined by how much you know about your reputation. Do others perceive you as overly conforming (i.e., too much getting along) or sucking the oxygen out of the room (i.e., too much getting ahead)? The most important part of navigating social life and being a good leader is keeping tabs on your reputation and modifying your behavior accordingly.

Lastly, well-constructed measures of personality predict individual differences in self-awareness and are useful in the workplace. It is empirically true that certain people are predisposed to taking in information from the external world and adjusting their behavior to fit the context. These folks steer clear of self-reflection, self-obsession, and the imaginary root causes of their social conduct. They resemble what most of us were taught as children but quickly forgot as adults: You should be humble, empathic, considerate, curious, willing to admit a mistake and try again, focused on how other people feel, and maybe even do the right thing and expect nothing in return.

This post originally appeared at www.vantageleadership.com. Vantage, a partner of Hogan, is a Chicago-based professional services firm that helps companies around the world build exceptional leadership capability throughout their organizations.

The 2017 SIOP Conference was the largest in history, and several Hogan representatives presented on a wide variety of topics. For those of you who were unable to attend or for attendees interested in accessing the Hogan presentations, here is a recap with links to many of the Hogan presentations at this year’s conference.

*Please note that symposium titles will differ from linked content. The content provided is to a paper within the symposium.

Conceptual Foundations of Personality Assessment in Organizations: “Useful” to “Optimal”

Interest in personality assessment in organizations continues to grow.  However, criterion-related validities are only at the “useful” level currently.  Three personality models are presented that have organizationally relevant labelling and are more differentiated at the primary factor level.  These models should help personality validity reach “optimal” levels.
Jeff Foster, Steve Nichols

Development of Empirically Based Short Form Personality Assessment

Short form personality assessments are nothing new, but many existing forms are constructed with an emphasis on internal reliability rather than predictive utility. A short form was developed using an empirical approach that simultaneously optimizes reliability and criterion validity. Evidence supporting the utility of the short form is provided.
Brandon Ferrell, Blaine Gaddis

Derailers Versus Personality Disorders: What are the Differences?

There remains little consensus regarding the structure and meaning of personality derailers. This research aims to fill this gap by comparing items from the HDS and the PID-5.  Results support the concept of derailers as personality constructs that align with disorders but are not clinically debilitating.
Jeff Foster, Blaine Gaddis

The Use and Utility of Big Data in I-O Psychology

Recent SIOP conferences have seen a surge in sessions on big data, most of which highlight future possibilities of using big data techniques in the field.  In contrast, this session will focus on active projects within the field and the real benefits of big data for I-O psychology today.
Brandon Ferrell, Jeff Foster, Blaine Gaddis

Factors to Consider in 360-Degree Feedback Ratings

The goal of this symposium is to discuss factors that can affect 360 performance ratings. Four studies on the effects and relationships of (a) culture, (b) gender and personality, (c) gender and importance performance, and (d) personality and self–other discrepancies in 360-ratings are discussed.
Karen Fuhrmeister, Derek Lusk

Identifying Grit in Existing Personality and Other Individual Differences Taxonomy

Proponents of grit treat it as a completely new construct, though a few studies suggest it is indistinguishable from other well-established constructs like Conscientiousness. This session focuses on examining relationships between grit and constructs from personality, positive psychology, and interests.
Brandon Ferrell, Robert Hogan

Differences in Judgment and Decision-Making Across Job Levels

Leadership judgments drive corporate performance. However, it is common for leaders to make poor decisions. Therefore, it is necessary to look at judgment tendencies and the ability to learn from past mistakes. This study examines judgement at different job levels to identify differences in key judgment tendencies.
Michael Tapia, Blaine Gaddis

Job Analytic Comparisons of Critical Competencies Across Industries

Using archival job analytic data, authors examined the degree of consistency in competencies required for effective job performance across 10 industries. Findings suggest that characteristics identified as important for jobs in one industry are likely to generalize across industries with few exceptions.
Matt Lemming

Validation of an Off-the-Shelf Competency Solution for Nine Job Families

Many organizations develop competency models to guide HRM efforts, but models may be based in business trends more than science, making validity evidence scarce. the authors developed and validated an off-the-shelf competency solution to help organizations identify individuals with personal characteristics aligned with critical competencies for 9 job families.
Blaine Gaddis

Beyond Cognitive Ability: Using Personality to Predict Student Retention

This study examined the relationship between personality and student retention. Conscientiousness predicted student retention across 3 years and eventual graduation rates. Researchers and practitioners can use these findings to develop personality-based interventions to increase student retention and reduce costs for colleges and universities.
Matt Lemming

Personality Assessment as a Supplementary Predictor of Tenant Behavior

Current tenant screening methods lack thorough research support and may be subject to adverse impact. This study proposes the use of personality assessment as a supplementary tool and provides evidence for the use of personality measures to predict tenant behavior, including payments, vacating, maintenance, cleaning, landlord interactions, and causing damages.
Michael Tapia, Brandon Ferrell, Matt Lemming

Improving Prediction Through Personality and Criterion ABC Alignment

Authors hypothesize that by aligning the affective, behavioral, and cognitive content of personality and workplace criteria, prediction will be improved. This hypothesis is tested in 2 datasets that have both personality and performance data. The results generally support the hypothesis; there was better prediction of performance on average.
Michael Tapia, Kimberly Nei

Using Personality Assessment to Predict Valued Outcomes in Healthcare

The healthcare industry significantly affects people’s lives but relies on objective data. As such, assessments of “softer” individual differences have been underused despite evidence that these constructs predict health-related outcomes. This symposium allows professionals to demonstrate how personality assessments predict a range of outcomes for healthcare providers and recipients alike.
Blaine Gaddis, Kimberly Nei, Derek Lusk

Maladaptation: Building the Nomological Net of Derailing Traits and Behaviors

Despite increasing interest in derailing traits and behaviors, there remains much to be learned about their construct space. By presenting quantitative and qualitative research results, authors seek to deepen understanding of how derailing traits and behaviors relate to other individual differences and work-related outcomes, expanding insight into maladaptation at work.
Brandon Ferrell, Blaine Gaddis

I-O experts from Hogan’s Research and Consulting divisions will showcase advances in personality research during an impressive 30 sessions, symposia, panel discussions, practice forums, and poster sessions at the 32^nd Annual SIOP Conference in Orlando, April 27-29. #SIOP17 #HoganatSIOP

Thursday, April 27

10:30-11:50
Asia 2
Conceptual Foundations of Personality Assessment in Organizations: “Useful” to “Optimal”Interest in personality assessment in organizations continues to grow.  However, criterion-related validities are only at the “useful” level currently.  Three personality models are presented that have organizationally relevant labelling and are more differentiated at the primary factor level.  These models should help personality validity reach “optimal” levels.
Jeff Foster, Steve Nichols

10:30-11:50
Australia 3
Giving Top Performers the Star Treatment: Is Meritocracy Overrated?
Should organizations especially single out—and disproportionally recognize and reward—star performers? Do stars really contribute disproportionately to organizational success? What are unintended negative consequences of meritocratic practices? These and related questions will be debated by a distinguished panel representing both sides of the meritocracy question.
Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic

12:30-1:20
Atlantic BC
Development of Empirically Based Short Form Personality Assessment
Short form personality assessments are nothing new, but many existing forms are constructed with an emphasis on internal reliability rather than predictive utility. A short form was developed using an empirical approach that simultaneously optimizes reliability and criterion validity. Evidence supporting the utility of the short form is provided.
Heather Hayes, Brandon Farrell, Blaine Gaddis

1:30-2:50
Asia 4
Millennials Versus Millennials Debate (and No One Gets a Trophy)
As scientist–practitioners, industrial-organizational psychologist must understand each side of the Millennial debate. The current session presents the different viewpoints through an interactive scripted debate and panel session. Panelist will “argue” both sides of the Millennial debate, then present an overview of their own experiences managing generational issues in the workplace.
Amber Smittick

1:30-2:50
Asia 1
What a Difference a Boss Makes: Leveraging Leaders to Enhance Employee Engagement
Given the impact that leaders have on employee engagement, this panel will focus on techniques to identify, select, develop, and evaluate engaging leaders. Panelists will share benefits and challenges associated with current practices used in their organizations and provide recommendations for other organizations to enhance employee engagement through improved leadership.
Jocelyn Hays

1:30-2:50
Hemisphere E2
Will Technology Make Assessment Obsolete?
How will assessment evolve in the next decade? Industry experts will explore how trends such as big data, artificial intelligence, virtual and augmented reality, social media, and the Internet of Things will force assessment to change. The session will offer guidance to those working to push forward.
Ryan Ross

3:30-4:50
Hemisphere A3
One Type to Rule Them All? Debating Predictors in Selection
In this presidential-style debate format, 4 panelists, each representing a common selection method including cognitive ability, personality, situational judgment, and simulation, will respond to judge panelists’ questions on how they can help organizations in 2 fictitious business scenarios. Fun and engaging conversation is assured to invigorate the audience.
Steve Nichols

4:30-5:20
Atlantic BC
Derailers Versus Personality Disorders: What are the Differences?
There remains little consensus regarding the structure and meaning of personality derailers. This research aims to fill this gap by comparing items from the HDS and the PID-5.  Results support the concept of derailers as personality constructs that align with disorders but are not clinically debilitating.
Heather Hayes, Jeff Foster, Blaine Gaddis

5:00-5:50
Hemisphere II
The Use and Utility of Big Data in I-O Psychology
Recent SIOP conferences have seen a surge in sessions on big data, most of which highlight future possibilities of using big data techniques in the field.  In contrast, this session will focus on active projects within the field and the real benefits of big data for I-O psychology today.
Brandon Farrell, Jeff Foster, Blaine Gaddis

Friday, April 28

8:00-9:30
Hemisphere A4
The Hungry Mind: Why Companies Hire and Promote for Curiosity
This panel examines the growing importance of intellectual curiosity in different organizational settings. Six experts from renowned global organizations discuss how they go about selecting and nurturing individuals with a “hungry mind,” why curiosity is critical for employability and career success, and how it impacts on leadership and organizational effectiveness.
Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic

10:00-11:30
Asia 4
Factors to Consider in 360-Degree Feedback Ratings
The goal of this symposium is to discuss factors that can affect 360 performance ratings. Four studies on the effects and relationships of (a) culture, (b) gender and personality, (c) gender and importance performance, and (d) personality and self–other discrepancies in 360-ratings are discussed.
Karen Fuhrmeister, Derek Lusk

1:00-2:20
Americas Seminar Room
Identifying Grit in Existing Personality and Other Individual Differences Taxonomy
Proponents of grit treat it as a completely new construct, though a few studies suggest it is indistinguishable from other well-established constructs like Conscientiousness. This session focuses on examining relationships between grit and constructs from personality, positive psychology, and interests.
Brandon Farrell, Robert Hogan

1:00-2:20
Hemisphere E4
Best Practices in Personality-Oriented Job Analysis
This session explores how to best identify which personality trait scales will be job related using expert judgments. The panel discussion will feature brief presentations from the participants, answers to a series of structured questions, and a question-and-answer discussion with the audience in order to identify cutting-edge job analysis methodologies.
Jeff Foster

3:00-3:50
Atlantic BC
Differences in Judgment and Decision-Making Across Job Levels
Leadership judgments drive corporate performance. However, it is common for leaders to make poor decisions. Therefore, it is necessary to look at judgment tendencies and the ability to learn from past mistakes. This study examines judgement at different job levels to identify differences in key judgment tendencies.
Michael Tapia, Blaine Gaddis

4:00-4:50
Atlantic BC
Job Analytic Comparisons of Critical Competencies Across Industries
Using archival job analytic data, authors examined the degree of consistency in competencies required for effective job performance across 10 industries. Findings suggest that characteristics identified as important for jobs in one industry are likely to generalize across industries with few exceptions.
Matt Lemming

4:00-5:00
Atlantic BC
Validation of an Off-the-Shelf Competency Solution for Nine Job Families
Many organizations develop competency models to guide HRM efforts, but models may be based in business trends more than science, making validity evidence scarce. the authors developed and validated an off-the-shelf competency solution to help organizations identify individuals with personal characteristics aligned with critical competencies for 9 job families.
Blaine Gaddis

Saturday, April 29

8:00-9:20
Hemisphere A4
Assessments on Mobile Devices: Our Opportunities at Digital Speed
This session will discuss current issues in the use of mobile devices for completing candidate assessments. The IGNITE sessions will cover topics ranging from prevalence of test completion on mobile devices, using mobile assessment technology as a recruitment tool, and key elements of a successful mobile assessment app.
Amber Smittick, Jennifer Lowe

8:00-9:20
Hemisphere V
Limits of Engagement: A Panel Discussion
Employee engagement is the amount of behavioral, affective, and cognitive energy dedicated by employees in their work. Although there has been widespread agreement about the meaningful positive consequences of an engaged workforce, this panel discussion will address if, when, and how there can be too much of a good thing.
Darin Nei

10:00-11:20
Hemisphere E3
High-Potential Identification: You’re Doing it Wrong
Although many of the numerous difficulties surrounding high-potential identification and development are well-publicized, this diverse panel seeks to explore high-potential issues and insights that are not commonly addressed in practice. Panelists will answer questions about the nomination procedures, assessment strategies, data inputs and development programs used in high-potential management.
Jackie Sahm, Scott Gregory

10:00-11:20
Americas Seminar Room
Recent Advances in Personality Assessment and Validation: Beyond Self-Reports
Personality assessments are a mainstay in personnel selection, yet applications to organizational research and practice have been dominated by self-report methods. This symposium showcases 4 papers demonstrating the usefulness of observer reports of personality. Papers advocate for the greater use of multiple sources of personality ratings in the organizational sciences.
Robert Hogan

11:00-11:50
Atlantic BC
Beyond Cognitive Ability: Using Personality to Predict Student Retention
This study examined the relationship between personality and student retention. Conscientiousness predicted student retention across 3 years and eventual graduation rates. Researchers and practitioners can use these findings to develop personality-based interventions to increase student retention and reduce costs for colleges and universities.
Matt Lemming

11:00-11:50
Atlantic BC
Personality Assessment as a Supplementary Predictor of Tenant Behavior
Current tenant screening methods lack thorough research support and may be subject to adverse impact. This study proposes the use of personality assessment as a supplementary tool and provides evidence for the use of personality measures to predict tenant behavior, including payments, vacating, maintenance, cleaning, landlord interactions, and causing damages.
Michael Tapia, Brandon Farrell, Matt Lemming

11:00-11:50
Atlantic BC
Improving Prediction Through Personality and Criterion ABC Alignment
Authors hypothesize that by aligning the affective, behavioral, and cognitive content of personality and workplace criteria, prediction will be improved. This hypothesis is tested in 2 datasets that have both personality and performance data. The results generally support the hypothesis; there was better prediction of performance on average.
Michael Tapia, Kimberly Nei

11:00-11:50
Atlantic BC
Dark Personality as a Causal System: A Network Approach
The origin, development, and nature of maladaptive traits are discussed as latent traits (e.g,. narcissism) causing sets of interrelated behaviors (e.g., arrogance). An alternative, network perspective is proposed for conceptualizing dysfunctional tendencies as causal systems of interlocking strategies. Item-level networks of Dark Triad are demonstrated and reproducible R code offered.
Jeff Foster

11:30-12:20
Hemisphere A3
Using Personality Assessment to Predict Valued Outcomes in Healthcare
The healthcare industry significantly affects people’s lives but relies on objective data. As such, assessments of “softer” individual differences have been underused despite evidence that these constructs predict health-related outcomes. This symposium allows professionals to demonstrate how personality assessments predict a range of outcomes for healthcare providers and recipients alike.
Blaine Gaddis, Kimberly Nei, Derek Lusk

11:30-12:20
Hemisphere E4
Maladaptation: Building the Nomological Net of Derailing Traits and Behaviors
Despite increasing interest in derailing traits and behaviors, there remains much to be learned about their construct space. By presenting quantitative and qualitative research results, authors seek to deepen understanding of how derailing traits and behaviors relate to other individual differences and work-related outcomes, expanding insight into maladaptation at work.
Brandon Farrell, Blaine Gaddis

11:30-12:20
Globalizing Selection Systems: What You Need to Know for Success
Hemisphere A1
Panelists will share their experiences related to planning, implementing, monitoring, and validating international selection systems. They will discuss strategies as well as lessons learned from these implementations. In particular, unique considerations important for global launches will be identified.
Steve Nichols

12:30-1:20
Hemisphere A4
Team-level Interventions: Using Personality Data to Enhance Team Effectiveness
Panel members will discuss their successes and lessons in using personality data for team-based applications. Topics will include best practices and ethical considerations for presenting personality data to teams, examples of creating and using team personality profiles, and other practical applications to improve team effectiveness and business outcomes.
Blaine Gaddis

12:30-1:20
Hemisphere E1
Mobile Assessment: Small Screens Become Mainstream (Demo & Panel Discussion)
This symposium brings together 3 assessment publishers demonstrating mobile assessment administration formats and comparing and contrasting their effectiveness. Audience members will participate by sampling assessment experiences “live” via mobile device. After demonstration, broader trends on mobile assessment will be highlighted from each publisher, and advantages/disadvantages of mobile assessment formats will be discussed.
Jennifer Lowe

3:00-4:20
Hemisphere A1
Looking Beyond Validity to Ensure Assessment Success
The successful implementation and sustainability of an assessment program is determined not only by the validity of an assessment but a number of other factors. Practitioners from 5 organizations will share their insights, perspectives, and experiences in how to successfully address these factors.
Jackie Sahm

There is nothing that affects an organization’s bottom line more than hiring and developing the wrong employees. In fact, a recent Huffington Post article concluded that an employee making $60,000 annually will cost his or her company between $30,000 and $45,000 to hire and onboard a replacement. That’s an incredible amount of money that could have easily been put to better use.

At Hogan, we have collected billions of data points over the past four decades that we’ve leveraged to help companies large and small across the globe to greatly reduce turnover and positively impact their bottom line. Quite simply, it all comes down to making the right personnel decisions, and our science is the best at doing just that.

That’s why we’re pleased to release the latest Hogan Business Outcome Highlights report. This report provides 12 case studies that demonstrate the impact of Hogan’s assessments on key performance indicators. The studies examine multiple outcomes and include a wide range of jobs, organizations, and industries.

This in-depth report proves just how versatile and accurate the Hogan assessment suite really is, and how you can implement them at your organization to better predict who will excel in certain positions, and who might not be the right fit. Ultimately, it will save your organization a significant amount of money that can be invested elsewhere.

Download the Business Outcome Highlights report today.

At a time when organizations across the globe are struggling to identify and develop the right leaders, Hogan has made it a priority to leverage decades of research to ensure all of its clients and partners are equipped with the best tools available. As a result, the Hogan Distributor Network has experienced a great deal of success against its competition, and the result is a much more effective global workforce.

A prime example of implementing a leadership development program “the Hogan way” is Hogan’s UK distributor, Advanced People Strategies (APS). Led by Managing Director Chris Humphreys, APS has more than 15 years of experience in helping organizations develop leaders both in the UK and abroad. Most recently, they spent a year assisting one of the UK’s top engineering firms with the implementation of a robust leadership development program. 

APS Case Study

Advanced People Strategies have been able to support a leading British civil engineering company over the past 12 months in the latest leadership and development program. The organization is recognized as one of the UK’s leading engineering solutions providers, and work on some of the biggest infrastructure projects within the UK.

The aim was to create a leadership pipeline for the business and to do this more objectively, removing personal biases that can come into play. The organization wanted a leadership and development program that could identify and develop candidates. Using APS’s expertise working with senior managers, APS was able to devise and support this goal with the use of the Hogan suite as part of its development centers.

APS ran five development centers which included a variety of individual and group based activities. Most of the candidates were very well established within the business although some had differing levels of experience. Using Hogan allowed the organization to add further objectivity when reviewing and selecting people for follow-up development programs.

APS supported the organization with a guided review of each participant. The Hogan Suite was used to predict potential and fit to future strategic leadership roles. These predictions were reviewed alongside the levels of skill observed on the development centers, people’s track record and references from within the organization.

The company was happy that it met its objectives to act on unbiased information when deciding the most suitable route for their people development. Whilst all the candidates were talented and well experienced within their role, the development centers enabled them to decide on who would be a best fit for strategic roles for the business going forward.

APS has since been able to provide continued support for the managers and their development, supporting them with reviewing their 360 and looking after the admin of this system.

Even in the company’s early days, Bob and Joyce Hogan always aimed to improve the global workplace through the delivery of their assessment suite. By arming talented people at organizations like APS with cutting-edge products and data, all Hogan has to do is get out of the way and they’ll handle the rest.

Hogan representatives Dave Winsborough, VP of Innovation and head of Hogan X, and Blaine Gaddis, Sr. Manager of Product Research, will both present at this year’s ATP Innovations in Testing Conference in Scottsdale, AZ next week. The conference, which brings assessment industry professionals together, provides a venue for attendees to learn from and collaborate.

Winsborough will facilitate a Featured Speaker Session titled “Disruption of Traditional Assessment Systems: Are We the Walking Dead?” The session will focus on how digitization has created a fundamentally different testing landscape, and how these changes have enabled significant forces that disrupt traditional assessment. Given the choice between being disruptors or being disrupted, this session also seeks to discuss which kinds of response should be taken. The session will occur at 4:30 pm on Monday, March 6.

Gaddis will participate on a panel presentation on “Psychometric Test Security Approaches to Mitigating Cheating and Faking.” In this session assessment experts within I/O Psychology and Education fields will discuss the impact of faking, psychometric approaches to detecting faking and cheating, the use of response distortion measures and analytics, and the use of both technology and “psychometric forensics” to detect cheating.

Also participating on the panel are John Jones, Kelly Dages, and Andre Allen of General Dynamics Information Technology and Joe Orban of Questar Assessment, Inc. The session will take place at 2:30 pm on Monday, March 6.

If you’re planning to attend the conference, stop by and say hello to your friends at Hogan. If you’re unable to attend, follow our updates on Facebook and Twitter.

Before organizations can identify and develop high-potential employees, they have to define potential in a manner that works across all departments and job levels. And, in attempting to do so, many organizations end up with a complex concept of potential that satisfies no one. The Hogan High Potential Model is based on Leadership Foundations, Leadership Emergence, and Leadership Effectiveness. For more information, check out the infographic below or visit hoganhipo.com.

What are the characteristics that define outstanding physician leaders? A yearlong collaborative study of more than 100 physician executives conducted by Hogan Assessments, executive search firm Witt/Kieffer and Providence Health & Services found that certain qualities can actually predict strong performance.

Using proprietary personality assessments and performance feedback, the researchers found that the most important and revealing features include: resiliency under pressure, ability to handle competing priorities with ease; trustworthiness and approachability; optimism and confidence; and a willingness to share praise and approval with others.

“We wanted to understand the difference between good and great physician executives,” says Richard Metheny, head of the Leadership Solutions practice at Witt/Kieffer. “By identifying these key characteristics, we’re able to create tools to help health networks find, hire and develop the kinds of high-performing physician executives that will lead them well into the future.”

The physician executive study also found that strong physician leadership fosters patient loyalty in a health system. Those physician executives who received higher patient loyalty ratings within their respective practices as persistent, self-confident and willing to lead and mentor team members. They are decisive, assertive and open to new ideas and methods. These high-performing physician executives also stimulate the creativity on their teams and are visionary leaders themselves.

“We now have a reliable template for gauging and predicting the performance of a physician executive, along with specific way in which today’s healthcare organizations can better empower physician leaders and structure leadership teams for success,” says Kimberly Nei, Ph.D., Hogan’s Manager of Client Research.

The study finding will also help health systems to understand different executives’ competency strengths, which will enable them to create the right mix within a team structure. For instance, combining a curious, scientific, data-driven approach to learning with a focus on the interplay between tasks and the hospital’s bottom line will do well to forward and organization’s business goals.

“Physician leaders are by nature curious and driven to improve,” says Craig Wright, M.D., a leadership consultant and former Senior Vice President of Physician Services for Providence. “This research helps them to gain insight into their potential blindspots and areas for development opportunities.”

Access the complete report here: Predicting Physician Executive Performance.