Finding a fulfilling career is no small matter. The average adult will work for about 90,000 hours, or one-third of their life. Most of us would prefer to spend that time doing our ideal job. We say we have the greatest job satisfaction when our work feels purposeful and significant. But what is a dream job, anyway?

A dream job isn’t one-size-fits-all. Job satisfaction is as unique as the personality of every individual—and it’s rooted in values. Leaders’ values determine organizational values. Workers whose values align with those of the organization feel the greatest job satisfaction, engagement, and belonging. They are more likely to be productive organizational citizens. Meanwhile, those whose values differ will probably feel unfulfilled and may seek work elsewhere.

Before we explore the organizational implications of meaningful work, let’s look at why we can seem so driven to pursue a dream job.

Finding a Fulfilling Career

The human impulse to seek careers with the highest job satisfaction has an explanation in socioanalytic theory. According to socioanalytic theory, humans have always lived in groups and group dynamics affect our motivations and actions. Three universal motives direct human behavior: (1) getting ahead of others in the social hierarchy, (2) getting along with others in our group, and (3) finding meaning. Finding meaning relates to both our individual sense of purpose and our group’s purpose, especially our work group. Work is not exclusively how we find meaning in our lives, of course. Other ways include religion, philosophy, the arts, social causes, family legacy, and many more. But work can and does significantly contribute to our sense of fulfillment.

For groups in general, the shared values of the group members create the group’s values. For organizations, the shared values of the leadership team create the organization’s values—regardless of what may be stated on the website about the company culture. Leaders who value entertainment and having fun at work will schedule happy hours and other social events, believing their employees value pleasure as much as they do. An employee who shares this value will likely feel rewarded, while one who doesn’t may respond with indifference or aversion. The alignment or misalignment between an employee’s values and the organization’s values strongly affects employee satisfaction.

Most of us have an instinct about what we value. For example, we know if we’d view a social event with coworkers as a good reward. Personality assessment offers a science-based method for understanding how values affect personal and professional preferences, job satisfaction, and employee engagement.

How to Measure Values

We use a Hogan personality assessment called the Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) to measure people’s values, interests, drivers, and even unconscious biases. Values explain what goals a person will actively strive to attain, such as belonging, quality, attention, or self-reliance. People tend to feel job satisfaction when a job meets some or most of their individual values. If a person’s work ever fulfills all of their values, they may feel they’ve found a dream job.

Someone who thinks a fulfilling career includes helping others might become an educator. Someone who gets job satisfaction from analytics and data might become an engineer. Similarly, someone motivated by both altruism and applied science might say engineering instructor is their dream job.

Ideally, a person’s values will align with those of their team, leaders, and organization. Humans prefer to share values within their groups in this way. Shared values simply make it easier to understand each other and get along. A team of cybersecurity professionals with low tolerance for risk might experience disruption or derailment if led by a manager who tests limits and embraces ambiguity. Likewise, that manager with high risk tolerance might not stay long in a cybersecurity company with a culture that emphasizes order and predictability. We humans tend to be happiest in environments that are consistent with our values.

While values matter to individuals, they are significant to organizations too. Next, we will consider how values impact organizations.

Organizational Impact of Job Satisfaction

Values impact organizations in four main ways: (1) individual motivations, (2) person-organization alignment, (3) leadership style, and (4) unconscious biases. Organizations that understand this and assess employee values can understand candidates’ likelihood of job satisfaction, motivate and engage employees, improve team cohesion, and describe their organizational culture.

Drivers

Drivers are values or preferences that motivate an employee. Drivers affect employee engagement because people want to feel that their work is important. Only 23% of global workers find their work meaningful and engaging.¹ Engaged employees drive organizational performance and innovation. For instance, someone who cares deeply about financial interests and growing wealth would likely be engaged as a fund manager at a private equity firm.

Robert Hogan, PhD, founder and president of Hogan Assessments, described the impact of values this way: “Values come into play when people have to make a choice.” Values help individuals and teams decide what to say, how to behave, what goals to strive for, and how hard to work for them. Someone who seeks enjoyment will act differently from someone who seeks acknowledgement. Likewise, a team that values challenging the status quo will perform differently from a team that values cooperation.

Alignment

Values alignment refers to how similar an employee’s values are to an organization’s values. The degree to which employee values align with organizational values strongly affects talent acquisition and retention strategy. With all other things being equal, the optimal hire may be the candidate whose values most closely match the organization’s. Alignment also explains how an employee reacts to organizational culture—that is, their level of job satisfaction. When people don’t feel a strong sense of belonging in their work environment because their values are misaligned, they are more likely to turn over.

“If the culture is consistent with your values, you’ll like working there,” Dr. Hogan said. He described a serious mismatch on a marketing team for an engineering company. One individual highly valued creativity, innovation, and quality, while the other nine valued functionality and analytics. The creative employee left after four months—a significant cost for the company. “If the values don’t align, you’re done,” Dr. Hogan added.

Leadership Style

In the context of values, leadership style refers to the culture a leader creates. “Culture is about values,” said Dr. Hogan. A team’s culture is determined by a team leader’s values, just as an organization’s culture is created by its top leadership’s values. “Values determine what a manager rewards and punishes. What a manager rewards and punishes creates a culture for the organization.”

For example, a leader who values recognition will likely reward employees by praising them publicly. This leader will likely promote their team’s achievements throughout the organization. Given the right context, this leadership style can be excellent. Team members who desire public accolades would feel appreciated. But what about team members who are uncomfortable with or indifferent to public recognition? A development opportunity for the leader would be to adapt their typical leadership style to engage those employees. Without that insight, the culture the leader creates could contribute to turnover.

Unconscious Biases

“Values operate at an unconscious level,” Dr. Hogan explained. Unconscious bias occurs when we project our perceptions about what is desirable or undesirable onto others. This affects organizational culture. For instance, a leader who values competitiveness and self-reliance will assume others feel the same. They may have trouble understanding or appreciating those who prefer teamwork and building consensus.

Unconscious bias can also impact selection decisions. An interviewer who disapproves of nontraditional behavior might disqualify a candidate who is less conventional. The interviewer might even do this unconsciously. Although unconscious biases aren’t always destructive, they are always significant, especially when they come from a leader or a person in a position of power.

In Pursuit of Job Satisfaction

We all seek fulfilling careers because we want our work lives to be meaningful. People who understand their own values are more likely to find meaning in their work. But values aren’t only worth awareness and individual job satisfaction—they’re also good for making mindful, values-based decisions. For individuals, values provide development opportunities to help us relate to others and improve our leadership. For organizations, values affect the ability to identify and retain effective leaders and engaged employees who will be productive and get results. “Values are incredibly powerful,” Dr. Hogan observed. “Values are the vehicle of culture.”

Reference

1. Gallup. (2023). State of the Global Workplace: 2023 Report. https://www.gallup.com

“I hope nobody finds out I’m really a fraud.” That’s an extremely common worry for high performers. Imposter syndrome haunts many of us despite (and sometimes because of) our successes. The three types of imposter syndrome all relate to anxiety. But the goal shouldn’t necessarily be to overcome it. Instead, we can benefit from it by allowing it to motivate us.

Recently on The Science of Personality, Michael Sanger, director of assessment solutions for Leadership Development Worldwide, spoke about the topic. Currently based in Atlanta, Michael has lived in New York, Amsterdam, and Shanghai. “I’ve always known how it feels to be secretly insecure,” he said, referring to his global experience.

Imposter syndrome doesn’t have to be bad, though. In this article, we’ll cover what it is, three types of imposter syndrome, the possible benefits, and how to use imposter syndrome to improve performance.

What Is Imposter Syndrome?

Many, many people who have met outward criteria for success have spoken or written about feeling like an imposter. Michael mentioned Sheryl Sandberg, former Meta executive; Maya Angelou, writer and activist; Howard Schultz, former Starbucks executive; and Sonia Sotomayor, US Supreme Court Justice, as feeling out of place, metaphorically looking over their shoulder, or worrying they will be exposed as a fraud.

“At its heart, imposter syndrome is a credibility tension,” Michael said. He pointed out that it doesn’t necessarily stem from low scores on the Hogan Personality Inventory scale Adjustment, which relates to tendency toward vigilance, self-awareness, and higher tension and stress. Instead, people who feel like imposters can have scores all along the Adjustment scale. They can show high stress tolerance, good self-regulation, and optimism. In other words, an absence of resilience doesn’t cause it.

The Psychology Behind It

Our current understanding of the psychology of imposter syndrome draws from the feminine psychology research of Karen Horney, MD, and research on the imposter phenomenon by Pauline Rose Clance, PhD. “Imposter syndrome develops when experiences in childhood are only selectively validated,” Michael explained. During childhood, humans try to gain support, develop a secure identity, and stabilize their self-esteem. When parents discriminate what aspects they value, children also become more selective in their self-regard.

Lingering feelings of inadequacy and abandonment can cause these individuals to feel concerned about how others perceive their work. These feelings may motivate them to try to meet expectations. Adults with this schema or worldview struggle to show growth tolerance, especially during increased responsibility, exposure, or success. That creates tension in their self-concept. That creates imposter syndrome.

Three Types of Imposter Syndrome

Imposter syndrome falls into three broad categories: (1) guilt based, (2) success based, and (3) performance based.

The traditional type of imposter syndrome derives from guilt, pessimism, low emotional stability, and low Adjustment. The second type stems from anxiety about success. “Think of the early-career executive who’s managing an acquisition or the entrepreneur who finally makes some traction,” Michael said. A determined leader who achieves a new scope of responsibility might feel like an imposter because their success has outpaced their tolerance for change.

The third type relates to the requirements of performing the job itself. “If you suffer from recurring bouts of imposter syndrome, you are likely going to be a consultant,” Michael joked. A former consultant himself, he described consultancy as a performance. Consultants are not usually subject-matter experts but must nevertheless appear knowledgeable. The drive to seem competent and relevant can affect their self-image and productivity.

Across the three categories, Michael advises people neither to get rid of nor succumb to it—but to leverage it. “The trick is to harness it in some way,” he said.

Who Gets Imposter Syndrome?

Everyone can feel like a fraud from time to time. But do women get imposter syndrome more severely or more frequently than men do?

The original research into imposter syndrome focused on the self-concepts of high-achieving women.¹ This created a clinical foundation for understanding it as a phenomenon that widely affects women. “Societal expectations on women across the world are often very different from the ones that are put on men,” Michael said. “There is no denying that that the challenge for women in the high-achievement space has its own set of growth/credibility tension issues.”

Survey research suggests that women are more likely to report anxious feelings when compared to men. Imposter syndrome may not be more prevalent among women, but people may perceive it as being more common because men who feel anxiety might not report it.

Do people today experience it more often or more intensely than in the past? Likely not. “Our brains don’t biochemically distinguish between being attacked by a saber-tooth tiger and the threat of job loss. Anxiety is an equal-opportunity employer,” Michael said. The expanded scope of our work may have increased over time, yes. But despite the modern cultural effects on imposter syndrome, the feeling of anxiety is fundamentally human.

The Benefits of Imposter Syndrome

“There are more benefits than drawbacks, but the drawbacks can feel stronger,” Michael said. Sharing an insecurity can create identification and connection between others who feel the same way. People who feel like imposters use nonverbal behavior like eye contact and nodding, which can increase their interpersonal effectiveness. Showing stronger social skills can benefit team interaction and collaboration. Investing effort into preparation to compensate for a sense of inadequacy can also motivate better performance.

How to Use Imposter Syndrome to Improve Performance

First, understand the difference between identity and reputation. In terms of performance, identity relates to the actor’s viewpoint and reputation relates to the audience’s viewpoint. Our identity, or self-evaluation, rarely aligns with how we are really perceived. Feedback from scientifically valid personality assessments and 360-degree assessments can provide perspective and reputational insights.

Next, seek tactical coaching and peer connections. A Hogan coach can provide actionable feedback to help reframe someone’s mindset about imposter syndrome. “Imposter syndrome often signals your willingness to push boundaries because you’re stretching yourself outside your comfort zone, so to try to appreciate this as your natural response,” Michael said. Peer coaching sessions can normalize vulnerability and feelings of imposture, inspiring connection, confidence, and growth.

Finally, practice self-love. People with imposter syndrome struggle with feeling worthy. “So few of us got enough love in our childhoods,” Michael said. “Until we can build back that self-love with good coaching, force yourself to give your customers love. They will love you back.” Loving others can increase your sense of worth and make it easier to love yourself.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 102 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

Reference

1. Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The Imposter Phenomenon in High Achieving Women: Dynamics and Therapeutic Intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0086006

Values affect our personal and professional lives in ways we aren’t often aware. They influence our work performance and organizational effectiveness. The importance of values can’t be overstated—values explain quite a lot about the nature of human nature.

Recently on The Science of Personality, Robert Hogan, PhD, founder and president of Hogan Assessments, spoke about the importance of values. “Values have shaped human history,” he said.

In this article, we cover what values are, how organizations establish values, and the relationship between values and organizational effectiveness. Let’s explore the impact of values.

What Are Values?

Values refer to the interests, motives, and drivers that shape what a person strives to attain in life. A group’s values are determined by the shared individual values of group members. “The values of the group determine all sorts of outcomes, particularly at the level of group functioning,” Dr. Hogan said.

Dr. Hogan has been studying values since the 1980s. “To have a proper understanding of people and their organizations requires saying something about values,” he said.

Values are very important for group success. Some values, in fact, are more valuable than others at fostering organizational success. Greed and selfishness tend to ruin organizations, while cooperation and innovation can improve them. A group’s values are therefore more significant to group outcomes than any one individual’s personality.

Values Are Unconscious

Dr. Hogan asserts that values are largely unconscious. In personality psychology, the unconscious is a concept that means that we sometimes behave in ways we don’t understand.

There are three ways of looking at the unconscious: (1) The personal unconscious is a Freudian concept that refers to repressed thoughts and desires. An example would be forgotten early childhood trauma. (2) The collective unconscious is a Jungian concept that refers to the history and survival of the species. An example would be fear of the dark. (3) The sociological unconscious refers to the values, precepts, opinions, and assumptions that we gain from our childhood environment. “You internalize them as a little kid at your parents’ dinner table, and you believe this is just how life is supposed to be lived,” Dr. Hogan said. An example would be overeating out of thriftiness or aversion to waste.

Personality and Values

Personality characteristics are always active and influential. For instance, extraverts seek opportunities for interaction, and introverts seek opportunities for solitude. Values, on the other hand, come into play when we make decisions. “The decisions you make are a reflection of your values. Your values generate your fate,” Dr. Hogan said.

When we are presented with a choice, we follow our values. They represent our guiding philosophy in life. If offered identical roles in two different work environments, we’ll very likely choose the organization with values that align with ours.

How Organizations Establish Values

Organizational culture equates to the values that prevail in an organization. Those values come from the shared values of the senior leadership team. Leaders impose their values on the rest of the group through reward and punishment. As a simple illustration, a leader who values punctuality will reward people who arrive at work on time and punish people who are late. “The behaviors that they reward get implemented, and the behaviors that they punish go away,” Dr. Hogan explained.

Since values are unconscious, leaders aren’t always aware of how their values affect organizational culture. Who gets hired, promoted, or fired is often a consequence of leader values. Leader values might also differ from the stated values of the organization. Misaligned values between organizations and leaders, organizations and teams, or organizations and individuals can all cause workplace conflict.

The brand reputation of an organization typically reflects the values of the founder. Dr. Hogan used the Hogan Assessments brand as an example. “It’s [high] Science and Aesthetics,” he said, referring to two scales on the Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI). “There’s a strong emphasis on data, but there’s also striving for quality.” He added that the MVPI scales of Altruistic, Power, and Hedonism also influence the Hogan brand identity.

The Importance of Values to Organizational Effectiveness

Leaders drive the values of an organization. Certain values tend to create more effective organizations than others.

Knowing what values an organization does endorse isn’t as effective as knowing what values it should endorse. This marks the difference between descriptive and prescriptive values. “The real question to ask is, ‘What are the values that characterize successful, high-functioning organizations?’” Dr. Hogan said.

Values that support organizational effectiveness include equal opportunity, downward delegation, minimal hierarchy, innovation and change, and data-based decision-making.

Two more important values for organizational effectiveness are implementing accountability and defining success. Holding people accountability for results is essential for accomplishing goals. It’s also necessary for the goals to be clearly outlined so everyone knows the criteria for winning. Leaders who drive success don’t always make passionate vision statements. Instead, they pay close attention to processes and measuring milestones for achievement.

“The best single predictor of people getting along is the degree to which they share values,” Dr. Hogan said. It’s the same with predicting how people and organizations get along too.

Listen to this conversation about the importance of values in full on episode 100 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

Hogan founder Robert Hogan, PhD, says that by “know thyself,” the ancient Greeks weren’t talking about simple introspection. Their concept of self-knowledge meant understanding the limits of one’s performance capabilities in any given interaction.¹ Similarly, Hogan’s concept of self-knowledge—called strategic self-awareness—requires understanding how others perceive us in social interaction.

When leaders fail to recognize their strengths, limitations, and values, their performance cannot meet its full potential. Their productivity and teams may suffer. Yet awareness alone is not enough. Self-awareness becomes strategic when knowledge empowers action. This means leaders must understand how those characteristics affect their reputation in context and what behaviors they can change to become more effective. At Hogan, we know that strategic self-awareness is a key driver of successful leadership performance.

To explore the impact of strategic self-awareness in talent development and leadership development, we consulted Jackie Sahm, MS, vice president of integrated solutions at Hogan. “Strategic self-awareness means determining what a personality characteristic can do for you in the context of your endeavors, not just understanding the absolute value of that characteristic,” Sahm said.

In this article, we will define strategic self-awareness, demonstrate why strategic self-awareness matters to organizations, and describe strategic self-awareness in practice.

What Is Strategic Self-Awareness?

Strategic self-awareness is the degree to which you understand your strengths and limitations and how others see you in any competitive endeavor. This complex form of self-knowledge has three key components:

1. Understanding strengths and opportunities for change and growth
2. Understanding how strengths and challenges relate to those of others
3. Understanding the need to adapt behavior to increase effectiveness

Strategic self-awareness is not focused on identity, which is how we view ourselves, but on reputation, which is how others perceive us. The distinction is important. In a competitive endeavor, the behaviors one may need to adapt depend on the viewpoints of others and the context.

For instance, a person with a flexible, unstructured approach to task focus tends to be tolerant of ambiguity but may also seem impulsive or disorganized. These personality characteristics might serve a user experience designer extremely well in the ideational early stages of a project. But when it is time to collaborate with front- and back-end developers, the UX designer will likely need to give greater attention to process and detail than they tend to do on an everyday basis.

Developing and applying strategic self-awareness is valuable for everyone but especially for leaders. Recognizing how one’s own behavior affects others lies at the core of effective leadership.

Why Does Strategic Self-Awareness Matter?

Hogan defines leadership as the ability to build and maintain a high-performing team. Strategic self-awareness is a critical competency for that.

But strategic self-awareness is challenging to achieve. Not only do our egos tend to deny that our reputations are imperfect, but we also often go to great lengths to conceal the truth about ourselves from ourselves. Most of us would prefer not to point out each other’s flaws either, making honest feedback difficult to obtain. This is especially true at higher levels of leadership, where a person’s rank may insulate them from hearing the truth. As well, human nature is so complex that self-awareness tends to evolve continually over time rather than occur in a single moment of mastery.

As if those obstacles weren’t tough enough, strategic self-awareness hinges on understanding how we seem to other people. Sahm describes it this way: “How is my behavior affecting others in good and bad ways? That’s at the heart of where the team comes in. Understanding what I am doing and how it affects others—making small but meaningful adjustments can transform the way that the whole team operates.”

The Detrimental Effects of Its Absence

The lack of strategic self-awareness in a leader can have a detrimental effect on teams. Sahm pointed out that a leader who is intense and energetic on an everyday basis might respond to bad news with emotional volatility or volume when under stress. To avoid the leader’s yelling, the team learns to cover up mistakes. This wastes time and damages the team’s ability to focus on work. It also means the leader makes decisions without complete information. The trickle-down effects can be severe.

Leaders who operate without strategic self-awareness can pose serious risks to the organization. Leaders who understand how they are inclined to behave under stress and learn to manage that behavior can improve productivity metrics. What’s also important is knowing when to emphasize strategic strengths or operational strengths, or when to act or rely on the skills of others. Leader versatility accounts for more than half of the variability in leader effectiveness yet is seen in fewer than 10% of leaders.²

To build an environment where leaders and teams thrive, organizations need to provide support for people to develop strategic self-awareness. Let’s look at some ways to help.

Putting It Into Practice

Before anyone can modify their behavior, they need to (1) understand their strengths and limitations, (2) understand how their strengths and challenges relate to those of others, and (3) understand what behaviors they might need to change to be more effective. Well-validated personality assessments offer a starting point.

Cultivating Strategic Self-Awareness

Personality has two major components: identity and reputation. Most of us are familiar with identity, which is the narrative we believe about ourselves. However, reputation is what determines most major career outcomes. This is why Hogan’s assessments focus on providing insights about reputation.

The Hogan personality assessments describe what we call the bright side, the dark side, and the inside of personality. The Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI) measures everyday strengths that help us succeed. The Hogan Development Survey (HDS) measures dark-side characteristics, also called derailers, which are strengths that may become overused during times of stress, pressure, or complacency. The Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI) describes the inside—the unconscious values and biases that determine career motivations, preferred working environments, and decision-making styles.

“Hogan is unique in that it offers this deep, true, and candid assessment of the good, the bad, and the ugly,” Sahm said. High HDS scores can reveal potentially negative characteristics that might hold someone back from effective leadership. For example, a person who is typically confident and self-assured may become arrogant, hypercompetitive, or even combative under pressure.

“A lot of times, those good and bad things are indelibly linked,” Sahm continued. “Part of what makes you special is also part of what makes you hard to live with. One of the most difficult things about strategic self-awareness is holding those two truths at the same time.”

Sahm affirmed that this is not simple. Strategic self-awareness more closely resembles a lifelong endeavor than a box to check. And although it can take time, it is possible to not only gain strategic self-awareness, but also use it to change your behavior (perhaps even shifting your reputation). 

Using Strategic Self-Awareness to Set Development Goals

Support is key—a Hogan-certified coach is an invaluable resource for cultivating strategic self-awareness and applying it in development goals. With an objective perspective, a coach can demystify assessment results by helping leaders connect their Hogan insights to their unique professional contexts.

Coaches can also provide tactics to help leaders understand where to focus their development goals and establish expectations for the development process. Effective development often hinges on minor, everyday behavioral adjustments, such as remembering names to build empathy. The benefits of these efforts are cumulative positive change, such as increased trust and strengthened relationships.

Anyone whose development goals are based on strategic self-awareness should use open communication about their efforts to change. Sahm called out two effective strategies to aid development: accountability and feedback.

Accountability relies on articulating one’s need for change and an intention to adapt behaviors. Sahm demonstrated the message that accountability can send: “I acknowledge I’m an imperfect person. I have flaws. I recognize this flaw is hurting you, and I want to fix it. [Saying] this is a tremendously powerful tool in any goal setting.”

Beyond accountability, development founded on strategic self-awareness requires feedback. The development plan should identify how and when to seek feedback. This might be an annual 360-degree assessment, monthly coaching, or frequent, informal conversations with peers and subordinates. Just as a competitive athlete studies her performance to refine it, someone who sets development goals needs perspective on how their efforts are progressing. “Seeking feedback on a goal that you’ve set to improve is the only way to know if you’re moving the needle,” Sahm said.

Strategic self-awareness—understanding your strengths and limitations and how others see you in any competitive endeavor—is valuable in the workplace and in life. “Know thyself” has been sound advice for millennia for good reason.

Expert Contributor

Jackie Sahm, MS, is the vice president of integrated solutions at Hogan Assessments, where she oversees the innovation, design, delivery, and execution of Hogan’s next generation of interactive, technology-enabled assessment and development products. She has more than 15 years of experience working in the field of personality assessment, talent management, and leadership development.

Resources

1. Hogan, R., & Foster, J. (2016). Rethinking Personality. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 2(1): 37-43. https://ijpp.rug.nl/article/view/25245/22691
2. Kaiser, R., Sherman, R., & Hogan, R. (2023, 7 March). It Takes Versatility to Lead in a Volatile World. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/03/it-takes-versatility-to-lead-in-a-volatile-world

Since 2020, year-over-year demand on HR budget expenditures has become greater than ever. US compensation costs have grown steadily,¹ inflation has increased,² but HR budgets have decreased significantly.³ As a result, organizations need to use their (or their clients’) talent development budgets efficiently and effectively. So how can you ensure your company’s talent development strategy creates value?

To find out, we consulted two experts from the Hogan Coaching Network. Rebecca Feder, MBA, is the principal at Princeton HR Insight LLC, and Jayson Blair is the managing partner at Goose Creek Coaching and Consulting. They shared their views about and experience with the talent development landscape, as well as some best practices for maximizing talent development budgets.

A key element in successful talent development budget strategy is having the right mindset about what you want to accomplish. “HR processes need to be business processes,” said Feder. “We think of [HR] as an extracurricular too often. You’ve got to spend the time and energy the same way you do with other business processes. You just can’t do it half-baked.” Optimizing the time, effort, and finances invested in your talent development program starts with acknowledging the role of talent in your overall business strategy.

Keep reading to find out how this strategic approach to talent development can equip you to retain your current talent, promote from within, and confidently set long-term talent strategy.

What Is Talent Development, Exactly?

What is “talent development,” exactly? How does it differ from leadership development? And who is it for?

At its broadest, talent development is a set of tools and strategies designed to foster employee learning, growth, and development, with intended outcomes that include engagement, productivity, results, and organizational performance. Occasionally, talent development is used to prepare someone for a specific role. For instance, if Kris sets a career goal to become director of customer engagement, their organization might offer them development opportunities such as stretch assignments, formal learning, or peer coaching.

Leadership development, more specifically, is the process of improving the leadership capabilities of individuals and organizations. In Hogan’s perspective, leadership development necessitates the assessment of individual strengths and challenges to create the strategic self-awareness required to know what capabilities need the most attention. Then, leaders practice new skills to modify their behavior with the ultimate objective of improving both team and organizational outcomes.

People expect and desire development. Of the 59% of global workers who are not engaged—that is, those who some might call quiet quitters—41% said they would change their workplace’s engagement strategies or culture, including more opportunities to learn.⁴

Critically, this desire for development extends beyond individual contributors. Early-intervention leadership development is an outstanding retention strategy for middle managers, as well as for their teams. For the 93% of organizations prioritizing retention,⁵ one way to show managers they are valuable and worth the investment is to encourage their development as leaders. Managers who have opportunities to develop also improve retention and performance among their team members.

Both Blair and Feder advised organizations to start any development strategy by collecting data. Well-validated personality assessments provide the most equitable and actionable data.

How Does Personality Assessment Maximize Talent Development Budgets?

Personality assessment data can lay the foundation for a variety of talent and leadership development initiatives, such as tailoring development plans for key talent, identifying high potentials, creating or developing teams, succession planning, executive coaching, and more. Given the pressure for HR leaders to do more with less spending, implementing assessment-based development opportunities throughout the organization can be an effective strategy, helping to advance other objectives. Ultimately, the best way to use personality assessments to maximize a talent development budget will vary based on the organization’s unique goals.

Let’s look at a couple of possible approaches.

Uncover Hidden Potential

First, personality assessment can help to identify hidden potential that might otherwise go unnoticed. Feder provided an example of how using personality assessments throughout the organization can help to fill a leadership role with hidden potential from an unexpected place. One of her clients used personality data to place the company’s lawyer into a general manager role. That person had the intellectual curiosity, among other ideal characteristics, to apply their knowledge of chemistry and law to fill a unique need. Feder called them “unstoppable” when supported by people who understood the company’s financial strategy. Personality data allowed the company to maximize the investment it had already made in developing the lawyer, as well as to supplement that person’s leadership with team members whose commercial skills were stronger.

Jumpstart Leadership Development

Middle managers are often overlooked in leadership development initiatives, despite their impact on business performance and increasingly strategic roles.⁶ Development plans informed by personality assessments can help these midlevel leaders strengthen the skills they need to move toward higher leadership positions. Blair emphasized that developing middle managers can be more cost-effective than hiring a leader externally. Data suggest that the average cost per hire is about $4,700, but employers often find that the hiring process can triple or even quadruple the salary for the position.⁷ In contrast, development is markedly less expensive, with average costs falling at $1,267 per employee in 2021.⁸

Moreover, this approach can help prevent leadership failure, which occurs at a rate between 50 and 75 percent.⁹ Personality assessment can help managers understand the strengths they need to leverage, their shortcomings and derailment risks, and their motivations and biases. With early development opportunities based on their assessment results, they can begin cultivating strategic self-awareness to avoid future derailment. Blair noted that organizations may find it much more expensive to develop executives who have shifted off course than to be proactive about helping rising leaders jumpstart development. “You can spend the $10,000 now or the $1,000,000 later,” he said. In other words, prioritizing development opportunities is often more economical than waiting for development needs to arise.  

When HR processes are viewed as business processes, talent development budgets will be built wisely with due time, energy, and money. Making your spend reach farther than it has before is essential, especially considering the latest trends.

What Are Talent Development Trends?

Talent development should be regarded as a long-term solution for retention, engagement, leadership, and culture. Because talent development affects business performance, strategic organizations craft their talent development budgets carefully.

Talent Development Budget Trends

Maximizing your talent development budget partly relies on responding well to HR budget trends. HR leaders should expect a smaller budget overall with less to spend on talent development. A common allocation of budget for talent development is one to five percent of salary or one to two percent of revenue, although this wide range varies significantly by industry and role.¹⁰ Outside of HR, competition for budget is likely to come from sales or other departments with more visible or immediate impact, Blair said. Within HR, competition for talent development spend is likely to come from talent acquisition or executive coaching, Feder said.

At first, organizations should expect to invest roughly equally in development and acquisition. In the short term, they will see talent acquisition costs decline as they learn to maximize their talent development budget. Eventually, they will likely spend more on development than on acquisition, optimizing their current talent instead of constantly seeking new hires.

Talent Development Strategy Trends

Feder and Blair each shared conceptual trends that they have noticed in talent strategies since 2020. Blair described an hourglass-shaped talent development strategy, and Feder described leadership development cohorts for middle managers. These success stories demonstrate some of the returns on investing in talent development—as well as why a common piece of feedback from people who have had Hogan assessment and coaching is “I wish I had known this earlier in my career.”

Development Cohorts – One of Feder’s clients invested in a middle management development program by creating three cohorts out of approximately 90 directors and vice presidents. Each cohort learned about intentional leadership and received customized learning exercises based on their results from the Hogan personality assessments. Senior leadership supported them by helping them protect their time for coaching and reaching their development commitments. These leaders quickly began to communicate better with each other using a shared language from Hogan data, which permeated the company. “That shifts culture,” Feder declared.

The Hourglass – Development shouldn’t end at the executive level. If an executive’s vice presidents, directors, and managers are not on board with the strategy, they can become roadblocks to success. Blair rolls out development in a tiered system, beginning with executive development and spreading out to critical teams. He builds multiple versions of a talent and leadership development program, tailored according to the organizational level. “By doing that, we are able to have more impactful change more quickly,” he said. Organizations must be willing to spend equally on development for high-potential employees as for the C-suite—that’s the hourglass.

Why Does Talent Development Matter?

Talent development matters for many reasons. Here are two that should stand out to companies seeking to maximize their talent development budgets.

1. Talent development promotes retention. Organizations that emphasize learning by providing an annual average of 75 hours of talent development per employee retain employees 5% more and promote employees 7% more than those that don’t.¹¹
2. Talent development promotes engagement. Forty-one percent of employees who quit name a lack of career development and advancement as their main reason.¹¹ Remember, pushing the leadership development experience lower in the organizational chart can uncover hidden potential and aid succession planning.

Blair gave one of the strongest reasons to prioritize talent development: “There’s a real opportunity to make organizations more effective and make the lives of employees much better if people really, truly take the time and effort to invest in the development of their talent across their organization, both vertically and horizontally. The democratization of talent development is healthier for organizations than perhaps anything else we could do right now.”

Talent development helps both organizations and employees thrive. Even though the slice of budgetary pie may be shrinking, there is more appetite than ever for the benefits of investing in and maximizing talent development.

If you have questions about using personality assessments for talent development, reach out to a Hogan consultant.

Expert Contributors

We thank our contributors for sharing their experience in using Hogan’s personality assessments to help organizations maximize their talent development strategies:

Jayson Blair is the managing partner at Goose Creek Coaching and Consulting and a member of the Hogan Coaching Network.

Rebecca Feder, MBA, is the principal at Princeton HR Insight LLC and a member of the Hogan Coaching Network.

References

1. Miller, S. (2022, September 6). 2023 Salary Budgets Projected to Stay at 20-Year High but Trail Inflation. The Society for Human Resources Management. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/compensation/pages/2023-salary-increase-budgets-stay-trail-inflation.aspx
2. US Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023). Consumer Price Index. BLS. https://www.bls.gov/cpi/
3. Burton, A. (2021, July 11). How HR Leaders Can Get the Most Out of Their Shrinking Budgets This Year. Fortune. https://fortune.com/2023/07/11/hr-budget-spend-shrinking-human-resources-recruiting/
4. Gallup. (2023). State of the Global Workplace: 2023 Report. Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx
5. LinkedIn Learning. (2023). 2023 Workplace Learning Report. LinkedIn. https://learning.linkedin.com/resources/workplace-learning-report
6. Houghton, R. (2023, August 21). Why Leaders Need to Empower Middle Managers. CEO Magazine. https://www.theceomagazine.com/opinion/empowering-middle-managers/
7. Navarra, K. (2022, April 11). The Real Cost of Recruitment. The Society for Human Resources Management. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/the-real-costs-of-recruitment.aspx
8. Association for Talent Development. (2021). 2021 State of the Industry: Talent Development Benchmarks and Trends. ATD. https://www.td.org/2021-state-of-the-industry-report-whitepaper
9. Hogan, R. (1994). Trouble at the Top: Causes and Consequences of Managerial Incompetence. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 46(1), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/1061-4087.46.1.9
10. Schleckser, J. (2020, February 8). How Much Should You Spend on Talent Development? Inc. https://www.inc.com/jim-schleckser/how-much-should-you-spend-on-talent-development.html
11. Durth, S., Komm, A., Pollner, F., & Reich, A. (2023, March 3). Reimagining People Development to Overcome Talent Challenges. McKinsey. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/reimagining-people-development-to-overcome-talent-challenges

If you’ve ever led creative people, you know that managing creative teams takes special techniques. Creativity and imagination can bring innovation as well as impracticality.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, and Blake Loepp discussed what works and what doesn’t when managing creative teams.

Research has shown best practices for how to manage process teams, transportation teams, supply chain teams, and others. But how to manage creative teams still seems to be an unanswered question with a lot of conflicting advice.

Let’s explore how creativity affects productivity and what it takes to manage creative teams.

Tips for Managing Creative Teams

When we talk about managing a creative person, we don’t mean a once-in-a-generation artist. People like Leonardo da Vinci are not very employable and are unlikely to seek work in an organization. We mean creative employees that you might find on a corporate team, such as UX designers, marketing specialists, animators, or content strategists. Employable people, whether creative or not, want structure and consideration. They want to know what’s expected of them and that somebody supports and cares about them.

Structure and consideration aren’t all creative employees need to thrive. Ryne referenced Ed Catmull, computer scientist and cofounder of Pixar, as a successful leader of creatives. In his biography, Creativity, Inc., Catmull names three concepts that are integral to managing creative teams¹:

1. Candor – In a creative context, candor means responding to creative ideas with constructive honesty that keeps the team from ideating unproductively. It means being able to say, “I see where you’re going with that, but I don’t think that’s going to work for these reasons,” without stifling trust or innovation.
2. Collaboration – Managing a creative team means fostering an environment where people want to work together to create something bigger than they could make on their own.
3. Focus – A focus on solving design problems ties in the aspects of candor and collaboration. When a creative team can focus on creative solutions in a specific scenario, it becomes clear which ideas are likely to work and what tasks the team members will need to perform.

“Creating an environment like this requires earning a lot of trust over time,” Ryne observed. “Trust is a critical component of teams.”

Who Should Lead Creative Teams?

In creative work, efficiency is not always the highest priority. “What happens when you put a bunch of people who know about business in charge of a bunch of creatives? You end up with a disaster,” Ryne said.

Having a creative person lead creative people has pros and cons. Often, a team leader is a former team member. “It’s pretty common in creative teams to see the leader is someone who is creative themselves,” Ryne said. A significant advantage is that the creative leader understands from experience that the creative process takes time, although a leader who isn’t creative can appreciate the nuances of the creative process too.

Defending the Team

The person who should manage a creative team is someone who can defend the team and justify their unique needs to the organization. Their leader needs to be able to tell executives that progress is happening, that more time or resources are needed, and that updates will be frequent.

Creative teams may seem to have no productivity for a while. A leader who doesn’t appreciate that creativity often happens in bursts would be less able to give a good account of the team to stakeholders. An inexperienced team manager might succumb to perceived pressure and blame the team for lack of results. In a disaster scenario, that might cause team members, the manager, or both to be fired.

Supporting the Team

In addition to standing with their employees externally, managers of creative teams need to support creativity internally. “When you create an environment where people can’t be candid with each other, where they feel like they have to agree to everything because ‘we all want to get along and collaborate,’ that can be really problematic,” Ryne said. Too much agreement—or too much disagreement—can hinder creative problem-solving. Strong socioemotional skills, including communication and empathy, will serve a creative team manager well.

Managing Mixtures: Creatives and Noncreatives

Many teams are mixtures of creatives and noncreatives. Creative people tend to score low on the Hogan Personality Inventory’s Prudence scale and high on the Inquisitive scale. These scores suggest a tendency to be curious, flexible, not focused on process or execution, disorganized, easily bored, tolerant of ambiguity, and resistant to supervision. To coworkers who score differently on these scales, creatives can seem distractable, unfocused, and even lazy. How do managers help people in these two types of roles collaborate?

“Creative individuals tend to work in bursts,” Ryne said. “There’s a spark. There’s an idea. Then you just work and work and work and work until you’ve got it done.” This production style can pose a challenge when working with people who aren’t in creative roles. Managers of creatives must provide the opportunity for them to work whenever inspiration strikes . . . without interrupting or impeding the needs of other team members.

What’s important for a manager is to maximize creativity bursts when they arrive, understand that the fallow periods are necessary, and build an environment conducive to sparks of inspiration. Forcing a creative employee to remain at a desk during traditional office hours could be genuinely detrimental to their work product. At the same time, the creative employee’s operational counterpart works best when keeping an exact schedule.

People with seemingly incompatible personalities can and do work together harmoniously and productively. Their manager needs to foster understanding between them about what’s expected from each other’s roles. A team session can be good for building mutual respect.

Advice for Managing Creative Teams

To wrap up the podcast episode, Ryne shared his best insights for managing creative teams: “Candor is critical for creative teams. Create an environment where people feel comfortable sharing the good and the bad. Create an environment where people feel comfortable saying, ‘This is a bad idea, and this is why we need to go a different direction.’ Too often in creative teams that are focused on collaboration, you never really create the thing that’s truly creative because everybody has to have their part in it, and even the bad ideas get included. Find a way to eliminate the bad ideas in a productive, nonthreatening way.”

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 82 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

Reference

1. Catmull, E. (2023). Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration. Random House.

Beyond the common awkwardness of performance review conversations, Gallup has found that work performance actually gets worse after the review for one-third of employees.¹ So why do annual performance reviews tend to be so unsuccessful?

As Gallup’s writers observe, part of the issue might be that performance review conversations tend to be tied to conversations about promotions and pay raises, or even used as justification for firing.¹ Not to mention, these annual conversations are sometimes the only opportunity for employees to receive feedback on their work all year. But there’s more to it than that.

Improving the effectiveness of the annual performance review requires us to understand its impact on the recipient’s ability to benefit from the feedback given during the review. There’s a neurobiological component to this and (of course) a personality component.

This blog will review some of the problems with traditional performance reviews and propose what an alternative model of performance review might look like. To do so, it will present neurobiological considerations for feedback discussions and highlight scales from Hogan’s core personality assessments: the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI).

Problems with Performance Appraisals

How frequently a manager provides feedback contributes to performance review success, but so does the manager’s style of feedback delivery. Both are linked to manager personality. Managers who are approachable and skilled at energizing team members (e.g., those who score moderate to high on HPI Interpersonal Sensitivity, HDS Colorful, and MVPI Altruistic) may hesitate to provide candid feedback because of the risk that the recipient will be put off and become less engaged. Other managers might wish they could provide the annual review in an email (e.g., low Interpersonal Sensitivity, high HDS Reserved, high HDS Leisurely, low MVPI Affiliation).

The structure of the typical performance review is another issue. Annual performance reviews are usually given in one sitting, providing much more information than people can readily absorb or integrate into new ways of doing their jobs. Since strengths, problems, and plans are usually discussed in the same sitting, the brain’s hippocampus (which stores short-term memory awaiting integration into the brain) can become overwhelmed, unable to retain the full message.² Because the person knows that potential problems will be discussed during the session, the amygdala (which acts as the brain’s siren) prompts the person to pay attention to only a limited amount of the feedback—usually the negative aspects.³ When the hippocampus is overloaded, especially if it includes information surprising to the recipient, frustration and anger are common reactions. This can happen even if the content of the feedback is not specifically negative.

In such scenarios, managers who strive to maintain harmony (e.g., high Interpersonal Sensitivity, high Altruistic) may take the employee’s irritation personally because they tend to be especially sensitive to rejection. Even those managers who are calm and even-tempered (e.g., high Adjustment, low Excitable) could become frustrated by what they might perceive as overreaction to constructive feedback.

A New Model of Performance Review

A few simple changes would make performance reviews more effective. For many people, two sleep cycles are required for important information to be sufficiently integrated into thoughts and behaviors. Because of this, annual reviews should be given in three segments of 20 to 25 minutes each and at intervals of at least two days. Each segment should focus on a particular area of feedback.

1. Inventory Strengths

The first 20- to 25-minute segment of the performance review should cover the person’s strengths, talents, and accomplishments. These strengths include all the reasons the person was hired, the skills the person has learned, and anything else they bring to the team. For the benefit of the individual and the team, the team member’s talents need to be incorporated into future plans.

Expect that even positive feedback won’t always be well received. Some team members are put off by having their talents described in detail (e.g., low Colorful, low MVPI Recognition). Even if they request constructive feedback, no changes in expectations are discussed in this segment. Inventorying talents is too important a topic to be clouded by other matters.

2. Review “Start Doing” and “Stop Doing” Feedback

The second segment, at least two sleep cycles later, covers the manager’s expectations for what the employee needs to start doing and stop doing. Both the “what” and the “how” are covered in this segment. This isn’t the time to discuss the manager’s philosophy on life, nor is it the time to overjustify the reasons for the start and stop feedback. This is because the team vision and its integration into the values of the organization should be made clear throughout the year.

Here’s an example of what this might look like in context: Two fairly successful salespeople were not providing specific and timely expense reports or clear activity logs. During this feedback segment, the manager described the processes for doing so, beginning immediately. This approach placed emphasis on “how” and “when.” The manager needed to be clear and persistent, and the simple reason was this: “I have a responsibility to my role, our investors, our customers, the other salespeople, and you. These are my expectations of you and of the others. These changes are part of accountability for all of us.” Although the salespeople had other more subtle growth areas, they first needed to get on track with responding to the manager’s expectations. The subtle matters could be discussed at another time.

3. Create a Plan

The third performance review segment, which occurs after at least two more sleep cycles, allows the recipient to respond to the first two segments. By this time, the team member has had time to review and integrate the feedback, and they are encouraged to express their thoughts. A plan is created for the person to leverage their strengths and respond to the manager’s expectations. Then the manager invites the individual to anticipate potential barriers to change and offers help that might be needed to execute the plan. The recipient is also invited to ask for the manager’s help in executing the plan.

Here’s an example of what this might look like in context: A new manager (high HPI Prudence) took a more structured approach to project management compared to her predecessor, but she was sensitive to the fact that too rigid a structure can inhibit flexibility and innovation (high HPI Inquisitive, moderate HDS Diligent). She had many start and stop expectations but was willing to take a measured approach to change. She decided to begin by increasing the level of structure in the next project. That way, the team could become accustomed to it and experience the benefits of a more deliberate process firsthand. The team made lots of requests for help from the manager while adjusting to the change, which she was happy to provide.

Substantial change is an emotional experience for many people (e.g., low Adjustment, high Excitable, high MVPI Tradition, high MVPI Security). Change is more easily experienced in a safe, listening atmosphere than when delivered impatiently by managers who are at risk of being unforgiving, indecisive, defensive, or judgmental (e.g., high HDS Skeptical, high HDS Cautious, high Diligent). When team members are able to review a new process and experience change gradually, change is easier to enact.

This blog post was written by James M. Fico, PhD, a psychologist and member of the Hogan Coaching Network.

References

1. Sutton, R., & Wigert, B. (2019, May 6). More Harm Than Good: The Truth About Performance Reviews. Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/249332/harm-good-truth-performance-reviews.aspx

2. Havekes, R., & Abel, T. (2017). The Tired Hippocampus: The Molecular Impact of Sleep Deprivation on Hippocampal Function. Current Opinions in Neurobiology, 44, 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2017.02.005

3. Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Why Zebras Don’t Get Ulcers (3rd ed.). St. Martin’s Griffin.

Assessment-based coaching is transformative, far superior to traditional coaching because it is grounded in objective data essential to the coach and the participant.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, and Blake Loepp spoke with four-time guest Jackie VanBroekhoven Sahm, MS, Hogan’s director of product development, about why assessment-based coaching is better than any other kind.

In her nearly 15 years at Hogan, Jackie has witnessed coaching evolve in the world of work and knows the impact it can have on people—when it’s done the right way.

Coaching Market Trends

According to Jackie, the executive coaching market is valued at around $9.3 billion—and growing at roughly 12% annually. “In the past, executive coaching was seen as an intervention,” Jackie said. “Now it’s seen as a performance enhancer, a signal to the executive that the organization wants to continue investing in them.” She also explained that executive coaching has gained a recent emphasis on well-being.

Other trends include the democratization of coaching, where coaching is provided for people at all levels, not just executives and high potentials. Technology has reduced some barriers to providing a coach to everyone. Artificial intelligence in the coaching space shows potential and seems to be gaining influence too.

The coaching market is absolutely flooded, which poses challenges for finding quality coaching. Approximately 93,000 coaches are certified by the International Coaching Federation alone. Many other credentialing providers are available, but there are no regulatory bodies for coaching. Given the quantity of coaches, their quality can be as variable as their rates. “Consumers should be skeptical of bargain basement pricing for coaching because you really do get what you pay for in this space,” Jackie cautioned.

Evaluating Coaching Outcomes

“The way coaching outcomes are evaluated today is mostly what some people refer to as ‘happy sheets,’ which basically means asking people how they liked the experience,” Jackie said. As many as 86% to 96% of people say they enjoyed the coaching experience, were satisfied, and would recommend coaching to others. This doesn’t mean that most coaches are excellent but that most people enjoy talking about themselves.

Satisfaction and enjoyment are easy to measure. Measuring the business outcomes of coaching is more challenging. At Hogan, we look for outcomes, or the effectiveness of coaching, in the performance of the leader and their team, most importantly in their organizational function.

Instead of just giving advice or the space for participants to talk, quality coaches will focus on behavioral modification that affects measurable business outcomes. Like athletic coaches who emphasize practice, evaluation, and refinement, an executive coach should give practice assignments, expect the participant to obtain feedback, help the participant to analyze the results, and set new practice goals. The coach keeps the participant accountable for their progress within the scope of organizational performance.

Assessment-Based Coaching

The key difference between traditional coaching and assessment-based coaching is the use of a validated, quality diagnostic assessment of any kind. At Hogan, our best-in-class personality assessments are designed to predict workplace performance, or the way a leader or individual’s behavior will affect those around them. That’s not all that distinguishes assessment-based coaching, however.

Measurable

Assessment-based coaching is measurable. It’s not enough for a coach to look at performance reviews and ask the participant, for example, how many hours of sleep they are getting. Just as a physician shouldn’t treat a patient without running diagnostic tests, a coach shouldn’t coach a leader without assessment data. Coaching that is based on assessment establishes a benchmark for where the person is beginning their development. It is also an objective evaluation that allows for clear goal setting integral to a proper coaching plan. To paraphrase Lewis Carroll, if you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there.

Insightful

Coaches need data on the behavioral strengths and potential weaknesses that a person brings to their environment. The participant needs to know that too. “Assessments like Hogan can be a powerful source of self-insight that a leader cannot get from any other place,” Jackie pointed out. Often, people aren’t willing to speak truth to power, so executives receive feedback that is partial, indirect, or even distorted. Assessments can help identify maladaptive behaviors and opportunities for improvement.

Differentiating

Assessment-based coaching is also differentiating. Given the lack of a regulatory body in executive coaching, clients often use certification credentials to identify expertise in a coach or coaching firm. They expect coaches to have specific certifications that address their organizational needs. “If you don’t have those certifications, it can be a barrier to entry for large enterprise companies that have industrial-organizational psychologists on staff who know what they’re looking for in a coaching provider,” Jackie explained. “In other words, it’s not optional.”

Transformative

A high-quality assessment can dramatically improve the quality of coaching for both the leader and the coach. Long-lasting, meaningful, and deeply powerful coaching comes from valid assessments that represent the richness and complexity of individual differences—not those that reduce personality to a handful of types. Valid, reliable assessments such as Hogan’s (when used properly by an expert) can transform a leader’s understanding of themselves and their relationships with other people. “End users say things like, ‘This was life-changing. I wish I had had this assessment earlier in my career. Thank you for giving me this gift,’” Jackie said.

Assessment-Based Coaching and AI

With the democratization of coaching likely to continue, coaching tech will help to shape the future of the space. “I hope we will see coaching become more outcome oriented with more measurable results and that we can take advantage of the big data we have available,” Jackie said.

Even if AI coaches don’t prove equal to human coaches, Jackie pointed out that AI could help automate some of a coach’s preparation, interpretation, or analysis. “What I don’t think AI will necessarily be able to do is replicate what I think is one of the most important aspects of coaching, which is human connection,” she said.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 79 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

In China, the Year of the Rabbit represents hope and peace.¹ These are much welcomed. After a turbulent year of COVID-19 surges and pandemic-related social restrictions, well-being in China is a concern for many organizations and their employees. Understanding individual differences, especially resilience, will be key. Can we expect the Year of the Rabbit to shed optimism for organizations and their employees?

How Has the Pandemic Affected Well-Being?

Research on the effects of the pandemic around the world has described its detrimental impact on well-being.² For employees, restrictions and lockdowns were significant contributors to poor well-being.³ Moreover, unequal economic effects have contributed to the pressures placed on workers and organizations.⁴ Each country has had a unique context in its response to and recovery from the pandemic.

In China, life during 2022 was distinctive. Major infection surges persisted, along with pandemic-related social restrictions. These conditions created unprecedented challenges for organizations, leaders, and employees to overcome. When the social restrictions were dropped in the fight against the virus, people wondered how the future would look.

Research investigating the effects of the pandemic in China found that there had been a detrimental effect to people’s well-being through 2022. By Q4, 27.4% of study participants had “low well-being” in comparison with moderate- and high-scoring peer groups. This was a high percentage in comparison with similar global studies of well-being.⁵ Women and younger people were impacted most adversely, along with expats. Yet by the end of 2022, scores had become low among locals too.

Low levels of well-being within organizations negatively affect productivity, increase employee turnover and absenteeism, and raise healthcare costs for employers. In the US, this can amount to as much as nearly $200 billion per year.⁶ Research has linked stronger employee well-being to other important pillars of organizational success, such as engagement, productivity, and overall company performance.⁷ Consequently, a focal point for business leaders and organizations in China is to restore employee well-being.

How Can We Restore Well-Being?

At Hogan, our stance is that employee well-being is the responsibility of both the employer and employee. Restoring employee well-being in China will require effort from both.

Research on the pandemic in China found that employee perception of organizational support could significantly predict positive changes in employee well-being levels (22%) and organizational commitment (68%) during the pandemic.⁸ This links well with research around the globe that found an increased demand for companies to support employee well-being.⁹

Of course, well-being is also the responsibility of the employee. Employees have individual needs, and their responses to the pandemic will have varied. But employers can take some strategies to help them become more self-aware of their individual differences.

Understand Values

A starting point might be using personality assessments to understand exactly which strategies are likely to work well given employee and team values. For example, Hogan uses the Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory to identify what motivates an individual at work. Someone who scores high on the Affiliation scale is likely to appreciate opportunities to work alongside others. Leaders who prioritize individual and team values can ensure employees feel supported, potentially increasing their well-being and organizational commitment.

Understand Resilience

Resilience is an individual difference that varies within humans. It is defined as “the developable capacity to rebound or bounce back from adversity, conflict.”¹⁰

Research from the pandemic in China indicated that resilience was a strong predictor of levels of well-being, explaining 50% of the covariance.⁸ Resilience could therefore be a key component of well-being recovery for employees. Determining people’s levels of resilience is likely to help employers understand their individual needs for support.

How Can We Measure Resilience?

One of the best ways to measure resilience is by using a personality assessment. The Hogan Personality Inventory measures resilience with its Adjustment scale. High scorers on Adjustment are generally perceived as confident and resilient. Conversely, low scorers are perceived as being prone to stress and may seem to take longer to recover from the pandemic’s effects.

Personality assessments can help people become more self-aware about how they are likely to be perceived when under stress. Likewise, they can offer insight into how others may try to support them. For example, those who score high on Adjustment may appear to deal with stress well, yet internally feel as though they need more support.

Can We Increase Our Resilience?

You might question whether resilience can be increased. While personality tends to be consistent over time, it is possible to become more resilient. The answer lies in development.

Hogan’s Chief Science Officer Ryne Sherman, PhD, uses the analogy of weightlifting to answer this question: “Some people are naturally gifted with strong bodies and the right hormones that make weightlifting and building muscle mass relatively easy. Certainly, they still have to go to the gym to build those muscles, but for some it is easier or more difficult. That’s how I think about adjustment—resilience. Some people are naturally going to be more resilient than others. Regardless of your adjustment level, becoming more resilient takes work, like putting yourself in challenging situations and persisting.”

An example of this could be proactively seeking out new work projects that could present a new challenge or require perseverance. The type and level of challenge depend on an individual’s context, but with support from one’s colleagues and organization, this kind of development can be managed well.

What Does 2023 Hold for China?

Organizational support can help improve employee well-being in China. To ensure support is individualized, organizations should seek to understanding how people differ in their resilience. A high-quality personality assessment such as Hogan’s HPI can help with this. In summary, support and resilience are key to “bouncing back” in 2023.

This blog post was written by Nathan Cornwell, MS, senior consultant.

References

1. Suliman, A. (2023). Lunar New Year: What to expect as we hop into the Year of the Rabbit. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2023/01/21/chinese-new-year-lunar-rabbit-cat/
2. OECD. (2021, November 25). COVID-19 and Well-Being: Life in the Pandemic. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1e1ecb53-en
3. CIPD. (2021). Coronavirus (COVID-19): Mental health support for employees. https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/culture/well-being/supporting-mental-health-workplace-return#gref
4. Cotofan, M., De Neve, J. E., Golin, M., Kaats, M., & Ward, G. (2021). Work and Well-Being During COVID-19: Impact, Inequalities, Resilience, and the Future of Work. World Happiness Report. https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2021/work-and-well-being-during-covid-19-impact-inequalities-resilience-and-the-future-of-work/
5. Ammar A., Mueller P., Trabelsi K., Chtourou H., Boukhris O., Masmoudi L., et al. (2020, November 5). Psychological Consequences of COVID-19 Home Confinement: The ECLB-COVID19 Multicenter Study. PLoS ONE, 15(11), e0240204. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240204
6. Pfeffer, J. (2018). The Overlooked Essentials of Employee Well-Being. McKinsey. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-overlooked-essentials-of-employee-well-being
7. Gallup. (2023) Employee Well-being is Key for Workplace Productivity. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/215924/well-being.aspx
8. Cornwell, N., & Rochon, P. (2023). Evolution of Well-Being During the Pandemic in China. Engineering Well-Being. https://engineeringsleep.com/well-being-and-lockdown-q4-2022/
9. Adecco Group (2022). The Future of Work Beyond the Pandemic: Takeaways from Global Workforce of the Future. https://www.adeccogroup.com/future-of-work/latest-insights/the-future-of-work-beyond-the-pandemic/
10. Luthans, F. (2002). The Need for and Meaning of Positive Organizational Behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695–706. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.165

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

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

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

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

Why Safety Matters

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

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

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

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

Six Safety Competencies

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

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

Compliant

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

Strong

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

Poised

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

Vigilant

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

Cautious

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

Trainable

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

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

A Case Study in Safety

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

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

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

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

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

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

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