Almost everyone acknowledges the importance of personality in distinguishing people from one another and making judgments about others. For example, when selecting a romantic partner, our research shows that 79% of men and 84% of women cite personality as their primary consideration. But what is personality, exactly? On a basic level, we can say it is a person’s disposition or core wiring and the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that stem from it.

Most of us believe that we are intimately aware of our own personalities, but this belief is only partially true. Indeed, we are experts on our personalities from an inside view, which can be defined as identity. Our identities are formed by the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves, and as with any good story, we tend to bend the truth. In the case of identity, the story is often overoptimistic.  

Others do not have access to the Pollyannaish stories of our identities. Instead, they experience our personalities from an outside view to decide the other major component of our personalities: reputation.

Identity Versus Reputation

A divide often exists between identity and reputation. We frequently misjudge ourselves, either being too hard on ourselves or, in most cases, inflating how our capabilities compare to others’. Therefore, we tend to have an incorrect understanding of our own performance, whether it be interpersonal sensitivity, leadership skills, ability to judge character, problem-solving, sense of humor, etc. Without reputational feedback, our identities can easily veer off into the realm of fantasized talent.

A great showcase for identity’s miscalculations can be found in the auditions phase of the reality TV show American Idol. Even if you have never seen this show, you are probably familiar with scenarios, either in fiction or real life, where a contestant either blew away the judges with the talent shown during the audition or the horrendous lack thereof. Let’s focus on the latter: the people who underperform in their auditions and are shocked, angered, and overcome by disbelief when judges such as Simon Cowell bluntly tell the hopeful contestants that they can’t sing.

What’s fascinating about these instances is that many of these unskilled singers do the auditions thinking that they are about to give one of the best performances of the season. Clearly, these contestants are hyperfocused on their identities and are crushed when they are told that others do not perceive them as they perceive themselves. Thankfully, instead of humiliating ourselves on national television, we can look to Hogan’s extensive database of personality research in order to learn more about the importance of our reputations.  

Reputation > Identity

Our data show that American Idol contestants are not unusual and that a significant proportion of people take identity-focused approaches to their careers in business.

This reputational ignorance is often consequential because occupational success is largely dependent on what others think about you, whereas identity is mostly irrelevant. In fact, it doesn’t really matter how well suited you believe you are for a job or opportunity because everything of occupational importance happens during social interaction, which takes conscious effort. Put bluntly, during every interaction we gain or lose a little bit of status and acceptance, and occasionally run a real risk of minor embarrassment and a slight risk of utter humiliation. Reputation is the cumulative result of these interactions.

Reputation — that is, how others perceive you — determines whether you will be hired for a particular job. After you are hired, it determines the results of your performance reviews, your opportunities for advancement, and more. Other people make and act on decisions about you all day, every day — and those choices are based on your reputation, not on your identity. All consequential decisions others make about you in life are based on who they think you are, not who you think you are.  

Furthermore, from a practical standpoint, reputation is the only observable and consequently measurable aspect of personality, which is why modern views of the structure of personality start with the Big 5 model of personality traits, which focuses on personality from the observer’s point of view. Identity, on the other hand, has no measurement base and no consistent measurement taxonomy, despite 100 years of discussion and research.

That does not mean that identity is totally irrelevant; it can be a very reliable means of predicting reputation. Hogan’s personality tests require self-reporting. Yet although we ask identity-based questions, we don’t use these directly to tell you about yourself because you already know a lot more about you than anyone else does. We will, however, tell you how others are likely to describe you based on how you describe yourself.

In summation, career success depends on people aligning their identities with their reputations. Inversely, career problems arise when people’s identities depart significantly from their reputations. Hogan helps people by showing them objective data regarding their reputations, offering a realistic view of how others perceive them, which they can then use to adjust their behavior. When contestants fight back on American Idol, Cowell says, “Go to an audition where they lie to you.” At Hogan, you might say we take a similar approach.

Want to learn more about personality tests? Check out The Ultimate Guide to Personality Tests

For the first time, Hogan has developed a science-based personality profile for leadership in the workplace specifically for the Latin America (LATAM) region. This profile is the best option for hiring and developing leaders in the region because it identifies the strengths, shortcomings, preferences, motives, and other personality characteristics of high-performing leaders.

Hogan partnered with local consulting firms in the LATAM region — namely Ateliê RH, Alto Impacto, Compass Consulting, HR Tools, and Thuoper — to improve selection accuracy and development for LATAM leaders. LATAM leaders are responsible for establishing broad policies, strategic planning, forecasting, and directing the work of their organizations.

Personality Characteristics of High-Performing Leaders

Hogan’s data science team worked with regional experts to develop a scientifically valid screening tool to improve the quality of leaders in LATAM. Hogan identified specific competencies, characteristics, and values that predict job success. Hogan built a custom personality profile using the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) that will enable companies to select higher-performing leader candidates.

Hogan found that leaders in the LATAM region emphasize the importance of teamwork by continually engaging in opportunities to learn, being supportive, and being willing to pitch in when needed. In addition, LATAM leaders need to balance a respect for the company history, but also innovation.

On one hand, this is important because there is a strong relationship between personality and performance in the workplace. The more we understand the characteristics and traits of leaders, the more we can predict their impact in organizations, including financial results. On the other hand, better leaders improve engagement among employees, and engaged employees are happier and produce better results as well. Hogan estimates that companies can improve the accuracy of their hiring by 28%, reducing bad hires by 14% and increasing successful hires by 14%, just by using this profile.

The LATAM leader profile can be implemented in any stage of the leadership life cycle within an organization, including recruitment, development, succession planning, and career reorientation. Hogan can provide a variety of personality- and competency-based reporting options to meet these needs.

To learn more about the Hogan LATAM Leader profile, contact your local Hogan distributor, or email info@hoganassessments.com.  

It’s almost Election Day 2020 in the United States, and political tensions are historically high. This year has been saturated with massive protests for social justice, violent riots, foreign interference in democratic processes, economic recession, reemergence of the white supremacy movement, widespread scandals involving political officials, presidential impeachment trials, political clashes over government response to the pandemic, record-breaking natural disasters, and general social chaos. It’s been a year for the history books, to say the least. In fact, public opinion is so divided that some are skeptical that presidential power will transfer peacefully at the close of the election. Like most Americans, we can’t help but wonder: Who should be president?

Yet, as personality and data scientists, we aren’t concerned with who should be president in terms of identity, political party, or rhetoric. As expert performance forecasters, we care more about known scientific predictors of success: personality characteristics. A couple of years ago, we reported research suggesting the American public agreed on the personality characteristics an ideal U.S. politician should have, regardless of political affiliation.

Presidential Personality

But then came 2020. Surely, in this even more divisive climate just before Election Day, the American public would vigorously disagree on what personality characteristics an effective U.S. president embodies. Right?

Wrong! Not even the destructive reign of 2020 can thwart the unifying power of personality. Over the past couple of weeks, we collected data to check in with U.S. citizens. This time, given the proximity to the presidential election, we asked participants to rate the desirability of personality characteristics, derailers, and values for an ideal presidential personality, specifically. We even used our new and improved Hogan Job Evaluation Tool (JET) 2.0, which is calibrated to pick up on finer distinctions.

We again found no meaningful differences among democrats, republicans, and independents in preferred characteristics of the ideal U.S. president.

The Bright Side of Presidential Personality

Differences in political party ratings were not statistically significant on any of the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI) scales, which measure bright-side personality characteristics (figure 1). In other words, our statistical wizardry found no evidence that participants rated bright-side personality characteristics differently across political parties. However, although not statistically significant, ratings differ slightly for the Interpersonal Sensitivity scale, suggesting that republicans prefer their ideal president to have a more direct communication style.

As shown in Figure 1, all three political parties felt that an ideal U.S. president should exhibit a calm demeanor (Adjustment), drive (Ambition), kindness (Interpersonal Sensitivity), rule compliance (Prudence), and openness to diverse perspectives (Inquisitive).

The Dark Side of Presidential Personality

Figure 2 shows little difference in participant ratings of derailers that could impede presidential performance, which are measured by the Hogan Development Survey (HDS). All three political parties rated emotional outburst (Excitable), resistance to change (Cautious), social insensitivity (Reserved), and arrogance (Bold) as bad for presidential performance.

Although there was a slight statistical difference between democrats and republicans regarding the perceived impact of passive aggression (Leisurely), this gap has little practical effect. Democrats rated qualities associated with the Leisurely scale as bad for presidential performance, and republican ratings fell just below this threshold. In other words, although democrats might want a president who has a diplomatic communication style (HPI Interpersonal Sensitivity), they also find it disruptive to have a president who might agree outwardly but then take action counter to that agreement (HDS Leisurely). Participants identifying as independent did not rate Leisurely characteristics in a significantly different way from democrats or republicans. And no party rated Leisurely tendencies as good. There were no other statistical differences across these derailers.

The Inside of Presidential Personality

Research has shown that personal values predict presidential support. Nonetheless, we found no practical differences among the values democrats, republicans, and independents believe the U.S. president should hold, based on participants’ ratings of the Hogan Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) scales (figure 3). Specifically, participants rated values for collaboration (Affiliation) and data-based problem-solving (Science) highest.

Commerce is the only value where we found statistical differences between republicans and democrats. These findings suggest that while republicans think monetary concerns (Commerce) are not an important driver for performance, democrats think being financially driven could be detrimental to performance. However, no group’s ratings fully crossed the threshold of good or bad. Thus, on average, Commerce was not significantly relevant to presidential performance.

Conclusion

This emphasizes the impact of in-group and out-group tribal psychology. When we strip away the political party (i.e., group membership) of the candidate and focus on more objective indicators of job performance, such as personality characteristics, we see people’s opinions come together and indicate they tend to agree overall.

Mindfulness has been around the world for centuries. For roughly 40 years and popularized by Jon Kabat-Zinn in the west, it’s been taught as a set of practices to increase insight, manage pain, and reduce stress. Also known as present-moment awareness, mindfulness has become a bright, shiny object in business literature and, to a growing extent, in research. Everyone is, to some extent, mindful. Hogan practitioner Chris Altizer, Hogan’s Brandon Ferrell, and PhD candidate Alessa Natale explored the question: Is trait mindfulness related to personality? Here’s the answer from their study recently published in Consulting Psychology Journal and covered by Forbes Magazine.

What We Did

This project began in 2016 with Altizer interviewing 17 Hogan coaches on the topics of mindfulness and personality, generating several hypotheses. In 2017 and 2019, we asked two sets of working adults to take the HPI, HDS, and MVPI and two commonly used mindfulness assessments, the Mindfulness Awareness Attention Scale (MAAS) and the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ).

What We Found

We found eight scales significantly related to one or more of the mindfulness scales across the two samples. HDS Cautious had the strongest correlations across the mindfulness scales, followed by HPI Adjustment, HPI Ambition, HDS Leisurely, and HDS Excitable. We found other interesting relationships between Hogan scales and different facets of the FFMQ. We present a summary of the results below.

What It Means

We discuss potential ways to integrate mindfulness practices into the coaching of different personality profiles in the article. These profiles reflect themes of higher emotional reactivity, distractible attention, and a lack of awareness, including awareness of self, of others, and of self-on-others. For example

• Low Adjustment or high Excitable – and especially in combination – may benefit from practices designed to create a pause between perception and reaction.
• High Cautious, especially in combination with low Adjustment, may benefit from practices designed to increase insight and reduce anxiety.
• Practices designed to increase awareness may benefit moderate- or high-risk Moving Against cluster profiles, particularly for the highly Adjusted, whose confidence may increase their risk of dominating others with less concern.

We also suggest that different personality profiles are likely to be open to different mindfulness practices. Some may be inclined toward various forms of meditation, and others to forms of dialogue or breathing practices. Of course, some will likely reject mindfulness at face value but may be open to practices like journaling, deliberate movement, or intentional eating. A key to understanding the application of mindfulness practices is that they are developable competencies – there’s no magic, therapy, or religious conversion, as Altizer wrote inMindfulness: performance, wellness, or fad? published in Strategic HR Review (2017).

Summary

There is no “silver bullet” practice that suits all profiles or people, which will likely come as no surprise to Hogan coaches regardless of their knowledge of mindfulness. As to integrating mindfulness as part of a development strategy, just as we bring in experts to build certain skills, coaching a client toward mindfulness practices may be best done by recommending a formal course, such as Kabat-Zinn’s Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction, or, for the more adept, guided self-study on one of the many available device-apps. There are as many paths to mindfulness as there are different personality profiles. Coaches and consultants are encouraged to explore mindfulness practices as an option for developing leaders and choose based on what they learn on the journey. The journey is the destination – as challenging as that can be for some personalities, some more than others.

Businesses have long used the powerful information contained in personality assessments to facilitate leadership performance and outcomes. Understanding an individual’s personality—or their unique characteristic ways of being—can be helpful when seeking to identify those who may be well-suited to leadership roles (i.e., selection), as well as to improve the performance and outcomes of those already inhabiting leadership roles (i.e., development).

Of personality tests available for these purposes, the Hogan Leadership Forecast Series (LFS) is far-and-away the most scientifically sound measure, and thus the most likely to facilitate measurable outcomes and predictions.* Given this, it’s unsurprising that the LFS assessments are used by over 75% of Fortune 500 companies and have been extensively used for leadership selection and development at the highest levels of these businesses. However, what is surprising is that very little is known about how the LFS might generalize to other types of business contexts—such as entrepreneurship. We set out to address this innovative and important question: when given to successful entrepreneurial leaders, are we able to identify key aspects of personality that might characterize successful entrepreneurs more broadly?

In an ongoing research project focusing on this question, we have collected data from 26 successful entrepreneurs so far (data collection is ongoing and we are actively looking for more successful entrepreneurs interested in participating in the study!). Even from this early sample, we can identify some key characteristics of the “Successful Entrepreneur Personality” (SEP).

Findings

In terms of normal-range personality traits, or those characteristics that define how people usually are day-to-day, the SEP is someone who is likely very ambitious and sociable. Ambitious individuals tend to be high in aspects of self-confidence, identification as a leader, they tend to be competitive and highly energetic. Sociable individuals tend to be high in their individual needs for social interaction, and tend to enjoy social situations such as group meetings and parties. It makes sense that our SEP is high in both – these characteristics are likely very adaptive in the fast-paced, competitive startup world in which success is also very dependent on interpersonal interaction (e.g., speaking to and building the customer base, expanding one’s own professional network, pitching a project to investors).

Even more dramatic than the high scores for ambition and sociability, though, is what appears to be the quintessential SEP trait—by far, the overwhelming majority of our successful entrepreneurs were very low on the personality trait labeled “Prudence”. High prudence reflects the degree to which an individual is conscientious, dependable, structured, and rule-following. How do we then understand our low prudence SEP? The highly successful entrepreneurial leader is a risk taker, they think outside the box, they push the envelope, they pivot quickly, and when innovating, the sky is the limit.

Some of our other normal-range personality traits did not necessarily seem to characterize the SEP at the mean level – that is, it wasn’t necessarily the case that a certain level of the trait was found for the majority of the sample. However, we don’t just look at overall levels across the group, we are also interested in variability – that is, are there some traits that are so highly variable in our sample that they point to places where sometimes being high might work for one successful entrepreneur, whereas another one succeeds via a low level on the same trait.

Two traits like this, in our data, were adjustment and interpersonal sensitivity.

Adjustment reflects the extent to which someone tends to stay cool, calm, and collected and does not react quickly to stress (versus low scores, who tend to respond more quickly to threats in the environment and manifest stress). In our sample of successful entrepreneurs, we found that both high and low levels of adjustment may result in a successful entrepreneurial leader. Low scores on adjustment may be quite adaptive in certain contexts – the ability to quickly spot a problem in a new product prototype or to get activated when presented with highly negative feedback from an early focus group – may allow the successful entrepreneur to more quickly pivot, to mobilize the necessary resources to correct errors and ultimately lead to a more successful launch.

The other trait that showed this kind of variability – with some of our successful entrepreneurs scoring very high and others scoring low – was interpersonal sensitivity. High scores on interpersonal sensitivity typically describe people who are empathic, warm, and trusting. Whereas high scores on interpersonal sensitivity can be helpful in certain situations – it may be easier for leaders high on this dimension to communicate care for subordinates, and to earn their trust and loyalty in return – low scores on interpersonal sensitivity can also facilitate effective leadership behavior. Leaders scoring low on interpersonal sensitivity, for example, may be more successful at challenging interpersonal tasks such as delivering critical feedback or even firing a subordinate, that are critical for a company’s ultimate success.

These early findings suggest that there may be some ways in which successful entrepreneurs are largely similar – high ambition and sociability, and low prudence – and other areas where being either high or low could lead to a successful outcome, perhaps depending on a combination of factors including the leader’s other personality traits, the personality of their cofounder and other team members, and the company’s industry.

Beyond these normal-range personality traits – or how we usually are – the LFS is a powerful tool to highlight our potential “danger zones” as well – or how we respond under stress. Are some stress responses advantageous for SEPs? This is the topic we will explore in our next briefing.

About the Successful Entrepreneur Personality (SEP) Study

The SEP study is a collaboration between Jennifer L. Tackett, Ph.D., professor of psychology at Northwestern, and Melissa Kaufman, executive director of The Garage at Northwestern. Participants in our study have founded or co-founded a company and scaled it from a startup to multi-million dollars in revenue. Most have experienced either a significant exit or taken the company public. Data collection is ongoing and we are actively looking for more successful entrepreneurs interested in participating in the study! If you’d like to participate, please email thegarage@northwestern.edu.

To download a PDF of the report, please visit http://thegarage.nu/sep.

*This is a guest post authored by Jennifer L. Tackett, Ph.D., professor of psychology at Northwestern University, and Melissa Kaufman, executive director of The Garage at Northwestern University. This article was originally published on Psychology Today.

* The authors of this study are not compensated by or affiliated with Hogan Assessments beyond a research relationship.

“Creativity is intelligence having fun” -Albert Einstein

Globally, since the pandemic began, we are working more hours, engaged in more meetings, sending even more emails, and finding the performance-like nature of video calls exhausting.  As many of us adapt to new environments, it can be difficult to find the time or energy for creativity. However, creativity is what’s needed most if our businesses and organizations are going to survive.

Creative leadership is one of the most critical and sought-after skills for leading in uncertain times. Read on for four tips to get you started in unleashing the creativity of you and your team in a virtual world.

#1  Rely on your Strengths

You don’t need to be a creative person to nurture a creative environment. The Leadership Forecast Series can help you identify your personal leadership strengths; and all of those strengths can be used to drive creativity on your team. Perhaps you are known for creating detailed and organized processes. If so, ensure your process contains a window for creative ideas that positively impact the overall result. Perhaps you’re a great listener. Set up a virtual listening tour with consumers, employees, or other stakeholders to gather their ideas on how to solve a challenging problem. Building a creative environment requires prioritizing creativity, not just being creative. Use the strengths you have to nurture a creative environment and outcome.

#2  Ask For It

When we need a higher degree of innovation, one strategy we can employ is to ensure we have creative people on the team. Hogan has identified a set of personality characteristics that are most likely to contribute to innovation. While people are one element, so is permissibility.  Studies have shown that simply asking people to be more creative can increase the number of ideas they produce. In a virtual world, along with asking for it, you need to create space. Some organizations are setting defined meeting hours, eliminating Friday meetings, or eliminating the video component to reduce exhaustion – specifically to give people more space and time to lean in on creativity. If creativity is needed for your team to win, you’ll need to value it and prioritize it. That means asking for it, setting clear goals, ensuring people have the time, and rewarding it when you see it.

#3   Get Out…

…of the house that is. The pandemic has many of us spending more time indoors than usual. However, research shows that a change of scenery and doing nothing are critical for creative thinking. Take control of your virtual environment by scheduling time to get out of the house for walks, gardening, or just sitting on the steps. Time doing nothing isn’t time wasted. It’s actually when the best ideas are formulated and stirred. The Institute for Advanced Studies, known for numerous scientific breakthroughs and a place where Albert Einstein spent a great deal of time on faculty, is known for nurturing creativity. They describe their environment as “simple…comfortable…quiet…and [full of] tranquility.”  If that doesn’t sound like your work environment, find time every day to create that level of quiet and tranquility for yourself, and encourage your team to do the same.

#4   Honor Your Curiosity

Nurture your creativity by following your curiosity. A new idea may not present itself in a fully formed state. Instead, it often starts out as a curiosity that leads to a path of innovation. So next time you are curious about something, honor it by following it. As kids we did this instinctually. We followed whatever was interesting at the moment. As we mature, many of us learn to ignore our curiosities in service to efficiency and productivity. “I don’t have time to look into that – I have to complete Project X.”  While that may be true, at least write down your curiosities when you have them so you can fully explore them later. Ignoring them may be ignoring the beginning of your next and most important innovation – for you or your business.

*This post was authored by Arlene Pace Green, Ph.D. – Executive Coach & Consultant, Enelra Talent Solutions, LLC, and member of the Hogan Coaching Network.

With many workers returning to their offices, preventing the spread of COVID-19 and protecting employee health is a top priority for business leaders. While initiatives like enhanced sanitation and social distancing policies are a must, the biggest threat to workplace health and safety is often overlooked by managers—recruiting safety-conscious staff.

The Hogan Safety Report, which scores candidates on several components of safety-conscious behavior, has identified six personality traits that recruiters should look for in new candidates.

Compliant

The Compliant scale measures a candidate’s willingness to follow rules and guidelines. Those scoring highly here follow rules effortlessly and tend to adhere closely to instructions set out by management. In the post-COVID workspace, it is important to have team members who respect new health and safety policies without exception. Compliant individuals are reliable and thoughtful additions to the team, following instructions closely to protect their own health and the health of their team.

Strong

People make mistakes when they are under pressure. Protective measures like social distancing are new concepts in the workplace, so employees will need to stay alert and maintain safety standards – even under stress. When it comes to health and safety, even small mishaps like forgetting to wipe surfaces can have a tremendous impact on others. High scorers on the Strong scale remain steady and composed under pressure and can navigate stressful situations without compromising on health and safety.

Poised

The Poised scale measures an individual’s ability to remain calm and level-headed in adverse situations. High scorers can manage their anger well and are less likely to lose their temper and make mistakes. New health and safety measures like hand-washing and wearing face masks may create obstacles in some professions, making daily activities more challenging at first. It is important to hire individuals who are well-equipped to deal with small ‘nuisances’ calmly without becoming frustrated and careless.

Vigilant 

The Vigilant scale is a robust predictor of safety-conscious behavior in candidates. Vigilant individuals are focused workers and are not easily distracted by their surroundings. Individuals that are concise and attentive to details are less likely to make mistakes that place their team at risk, which makes them valuable in the post-COVID workspace.

Cautious

The Cautious scale measures an individual’s risk-taking tendencies. Cautious scorers make sure to pause and evaluate their options before making risky decisions. Now more than ever, people are being encouraged to think twice about everyday activities and interactions, like shaking hands, to mitigate the risk of spreading COVID-19. Leaders will benefit greatly from hiring cautious and considerate candidates who think twice about how their actions impact their entire team.

Trainable

Finally, it is important to note that when faced with great change, humans make mistakes. As businesses reopen, the post-COVID workplace will present many new challenges for workers and training will be necessary. Trainable candidates are receptive to feedback and easily coached on new initiatives. Having team members who enjoy learning and are willing to correct their mistakes and take advice will be an asset to leaders moving forward. Trainable candidates will make the most out of this new approach to work and will be a positive and uplifting addition to the team.

“Unsafe employee behaviors can have many negative impacts on businesses, costing them billions and placing the health and safety of fellow employees at risk” says now-former Hogan CEO Scott Gregory. “This is particularly salient in a post-COVID business climate, where occupational health and safety is a major concern for employees and business leaders alike. When the health of your business and the general public is at stake, it is time to ensure you are hiring and coaching employees who will be attentive to their own, their co-workers’, and their customers’ safety. The key to this lies in personality.”

Many of our clients use Hogan Assessments to support selection and talent development programs. Due to the pandemic, however, selection has (understandably) been cut back dramatically. Now, HR teams have to focus on more difficult people issues while learning and development programs may be put on hold.

However, we still speak to HR professionals and coaches on a daily basis about support for different types of people initiatives. Not surprisingly, at a time when leaders are making decisions in high-pressure circumstances, and with budgets tighter than ever, addressing difficult people issues is extra complicated. As a result, we are keen to encourage clients to use valuable resources that are already available to them.

Many have not thought about using existing resources to support pressing, often unavoidable interventions. Here are three of the most common situations where we have been able to recommend organizations take another look at the Hogan Assessment data they already hold.

Leaders Under Pressure

The last three months have caused unprecedented stress for those in senior positions, who have had to balance the future survival of their organizations with the welfare and motivation of their workforces. Many leaders are showing signs of derailers, or performance risks, which are starting to impede their effectiveness and create problems with relationships. But we have also seen many leaders who appear to thrive despite what is happening because they see present problems as new and interesting challenges. Revisiting Hogan Development Survey (HDS) scores can provide real insight for leaders about how their natural coping mechanisms may be showing up and help identify strategies to manage them.

Virtual Teams

While there was already a push to more remote working and less travel, teams meeting virtually with little or no face-to-face contact have increased exponentially. Some people enjoy the independence, while others miss the close collaboration. Some teams must completely adapt how they work to stand still, let alone become high performing. Collective Hogan data can help teams understand their collective strengths and skill gaps; how they are likely to communicate, innovate, and adapt; and how their culture and values might influence their approach.

Organizational Restructuring

We have been hearing about more cases of downsizing and mergers of departments and functions, which mean people are being displaced and roles are disappearing. Existing Hogan results can serve as additional objective data during times of difficult decisions. Hogan results provide information to help identify candidates who will be best placed to succeed in new roles with changed responsibilities and requirements. For those who find themselves in the really unfortunate position of losing their jobs, Hogan profiles can be used to support outplacement by helping to identify how people work through the emotional rollercoaster and by highlighting roles and environments that are likely to play to their strengths and values in future.

While the dynamics and focus may have changed, HR professionals and coaches are still supporting people on a daily basis. Hogan’s suite of tools identifies how people are likely to show up at their best and, in times of pressure, at their worst — providing insights during difficult, ambiguous, and complex times. It’s time to take another look at existing Hogan reports.

*This post was authored by Melvyn Payne, Commercial Director for Advanced People Strategies.

Entrepreneurs tend to have a heroic status around the globe — and for good reason. Entrepreneurialism encourages individual proactivity, creativity, and economic vitality, yet a significant number of startups fail for many well-documented reasons. The organizational psychologist in me wonders: What does personality psychology have to say about derailed entrepreneurial enterprises?

As noted, entrepreneurs play a key role in keeping economies competitive. They are known for removing the old and inefficient and replacing it with the new and improved, which suggests that entrepreneurs are creative people. Michael Kirton’s work on creative problem-solving shows how entrepreneurial people often take an innovative approach by questioning assumptions, redefining the problem, and introducing different solutions.

The Dark Side of the Entrepreneurial Personality

But is there a downside to the entrepreneurial personality? In a study examining dark-side personality characteristics, 256 entrepreneurs, who were in the early stages of building technology companies in the United States, completed the Hogan Development Survey (HDS). The results showed that average scores were particularly high for the Leisurely, Mischievous, and Imaginative scales. On the upside, this indicates that others are likely to see entrepreneurs as people who march to the beat of their own drum, are willing to move quickly, break the rules, and think in novel or unusual ways. This aligns nicely with the literature on entrepreneurship and the characteristics of creative people in general. Furthermore, it reconfirms the reputation that entrepreneurs have in the world at large as rebels, disruptors, and innovators.

The HDS predicts how derailment is likely to take shape by pinpointing the Janus faces of positive personality characteristics. Entrepreneurs are likely to have an overemphasized sense of autonomy and a tendency to be stubborn or indifferent (high Leisurely). They are also susceptible to crossing the line that divides constructive rebelliousness from destructive recklessness (high Mischievous). Finally, they can go from proposing original ideas to suggesting ideas that may seem odd or rash (high Imaginative). Just like Icarus of the classic Greek fable, the entrepreneur’s greatest assets can become serious liabilities.

Derailment Among Entrepreneurs

What are the implications of this derailment pattern? The research of economist Danny Miller on the downfall of companies is instructive. Miller, the author of The Icarus Paradox: How Exceptional Companies Bring About Their Own Downfall, shows that when inventive entrepreneurs (he calls them pioneers) are in command, they bring about their own downfalls because they innovate too much and become what he calls escapists. This means a firm’s hot pursuit of technological advancement might lead an entrepreneur to introduce impractical or expensive products. Entrepreneurs are also prone to prematurely making their own offerings obsolete. Additionally, the organizational structure inside these firms can go from organic to chaotic. Miller identifies Minneapolis-based Control Data Corporation as emblematic of the pioneer-to-escapist trajectory. Now broken up, Control Data Corporation once excelled as a designer of supercomputers. Can pioneering entrepreneurs avoid the pull of this beaten downward path?

The first step to avoiding derailment is understanding how you are likely to derail in the first place. Hogan calls this “strategic self-awareness.” The key to self-improvement is understanding how you come across to others when at your best and at your worst. The second step is assembling a team that counteracts your counterproductive behaviors. Adam Lashinsky, author of Inside Apple: How America’s Most Admired—And Secretive—Company Really Works, says that enlightened team building was a pivotal reason for the mercurial Steve Jobs’s successful second tenure. The moral of the story is this: First, seek to understand how you are most likely to overdo your strengths, then seek to build a team with complementary strengths. Too much of a good thing can be a bad thing.

*This is a guest post authored by Jorge Fernandez, a member of the Hogan Coaching Network.

C. Northcote Parkinson (1909—1993) was a British naval historian, lecturer, and novelist; he formulated his famous law in an essay in The Economist in 1955. Parkinson’s law was intended to describe the behavior of managers in the British Navy and British government, but it is also a pretty good description of work in most organizations. The July 11^th, 2020 issue of The Economist provides an update of Parkinson’s astute generalization about organizational behavior.

The law itself states: “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” I think there are three psychological explanations for Parkinson’s law. The first is the human tendency to procrastinate, to put off doing things until the last minute. Procrastination itself has several causes including fear of failure, laziness, and, of course, passive aggression (“Don’t rush me!”). But the point is that procrastination is one way to explain Parkinson’s law. A second explanation for Parkinson’s law is the fact that if people complete a task promptly, they risk being assigned a second, and even more tedious, task. The reverse of this situation is, of course, “If you want to get something done, find a busy person.” A third explanation for Parkinson’s law is “impression management”; most people understand the importance of being seen to be working while at work. In this context, it makes sense to extend the duration of each task. Parkinson pointedly noted that managers help other managers look busy by shuffling papers back and forth for review, commentary, and alignment.

However, when people are working at home, there is a clear temptation for some to figure out the minimum level of effort they can get away with and still get by. There is no need to drag out each task; people can just do their work, spend the rest of the day doing as they please, and then turn in their work just before the deadline. For these people, The Economist suggests rewriting the law as follows: “For the unconcerned, when unobserved, work shrinks to fill the time required.”

For hard-charging people, working at home leads to a different outcome. Wracked by guilt and anxiety, they work even harder than before. For these people, the law reads: “For anxious home workers, work expands to fill all their waking hours.”

But Parkinson was talking about more than procrastination, he was talking about the fact that managers, in order to advance, argue that the size of their workload requires that they hire more people. They evaluate themselves, and they are evaluated, based on the number of their direct reports. But hiring more people doesn’t lead to greater productivity, just a larger payroll. In addition, like everyone else, managers need to appear busy. How does that work out during lockdown? The answer is to organize Zoom meetings. And this leads to a final revision of Parkinson’s law: “In lockdown, Zoom expands to fill all of the manager’s available time.”

The slackers will avoid the Zoom meetings and the hard charging people will attend all of them. Moreover, in order to be noticed at a Zoom meeting, people must be seen and heard, which makes Zoom meetings even longer than normal meetings. And ping-ponging between Zoom meetings is the digital version of the paper shuffling mangers engaged in during Parkinson’s day.

I close with two final points. First, the degree to which people work hard and are productive is a function of their personality not their work location. And second, smart businesspeople are already expressing doubts about the wisdom of working from home.