Team psychological safety is the shared perception of whether it is safe or risky for team members to show their authentic selves to each other. The presence of fear—whether a leader’s fears or fear of the leader—destroys trust and creates a sense that interpersonal risk-taking is dangerous.

Many people see leaders as those who give orders and assess others; however, leaders who successfully build and maintain high-performing teams focus on setting direction, supporting others, and cultivating psychological safety.¹ The leader role calls for the strategic self-awareness to understand and control one’s dysfunctional behaviour, or derailers, that may arise during stress, overwork, fatigue, or other situations in which self-management tends to be compromised.

Read on to learn about how we measure derailers, the effects of five specific derailers on psychological safety, and ways leaders can improve team psychological safety.

The Dark Side of Leadership

The Hogan Development Survey (HDS) measures personality strengths that, when overused, can become problematic. Everyone’s personality has dark-side characteristics—potential behaviours stemming from personality strengths that could derail performance. A leader who cares about quality, for example, might overuse that characteristic, becoming obsessive about project details or stalling in fear of making an incorrect decision. A leader who cares about self-sufficiency might overuse that characteristic, appearing tough, aloof, or indifferent to team members. While a commitment to excellence and an appreciation for independence are positive qualities, without moderation they can become risk factors that destroy teams or derail careers.

The HDS consists of 11 scales that are categorized into three clusters that broadly describe stress responses: moving away from others (withdrawal), moving against others (antagonism), or moving toward others (conformity). Most people have one or more elevated scores, and elevations often occur within the same cluster.

The Moving Away cluster is defined by the Excitable, Skeptical, Cautious, Reserved, and Leisurely scales.² Derailing behaviours stemming from high scores on these scales can be uniquely damaging to psychological safety. Because derailment in this cluster often involves increasing the distance between people as a method for dealing with insecurity, it can be especially instrumental in creating room for people to fear the worst. Characterized by lack of communication or communication that critiques, Moving Away derailers can damage psychological safety by fostering intimidation and by stifling trust and openness.

Excitable

“You force me to express in no uncertain terms how much I have become disappointed with you.”

The Excitable scale describes behaviours that range from calmness and steadiness to volatility and explosiveness. Because they can be prone to intense emotion and struggle to manage pressure, people with a high Excitable score might express their fears or frustrations by seeming moody, tending to overreact, or exhibiting annoyance, tension, or stress.

Sceptical

“I am being mistreated and taken advantage of, and so I am fully justified in responding in kind.”

The Sceptical scale describes behaviours that range from showing trust in others to expecting disappointment or mistreatment. Someone with a high Sceptical score tends to suspect that others harbor ulterior motives. They may appear brooding or defensive and act retaliatory about perceived slights.

Cautious

“I have no option but to point out all the potential problems that could occur, because otherwise you will make changes that could have disastrous consequences.”

The Cautious scale describes behaviours that range from openness to reluctance about trying new methods, technology, or experiences. Highly motivated by fear of embarrassment and failure, people with a high Cautious score may exhibit hesitance in decision-making, analysis paralysis, or obsession with details. They tend to resist risk.

Reserved

“You say that I am not listening to you. You must realize that if you could say anything that is of interest to me, I would listen.”

The Reserved scale describes behaviors that range from socially approachable to socially distant. Someone with a high Reserved score may adopt a tough or harsh communication style and may employ a closed-door policy. Their critical, independent air can damage the transparency and open communication that psychological safety depends on.

Leisurely

“The only reason I have ignored you is because you always interrupt me at a time when you should be doing your own work.”

The Leisurely scale describes behaviors that range from being cooperative, coachable, and supportive to being stubborn or privately resentful. Those with high Leisurely scores may appear friendly but feel hostile, creating doubt about whether they express their thoughts or feelings honestly. Their irritability and passive resistance can make them seem unreliable.

The Moving Away cluster describes the behaviors of a person who may be prone to emotional displays, alert for signs of betrayal, afraid of criticism, distant and uncommunicative, or resentful of authority.² Moving Away derailers can become problematic when people with elevated scores come under stress or stop self-managing. A leader with any of these qualities out of control would likely struggle to nurture the goodwill, camaraderie, and mutual trust that is necessary for psychological safety.

Understanding Fears and Improving Psychological Safety

It is incumbent upon leaders to address their fears or the way their behavior may create fear in others. Leaders can improve the psychological safety of their teams with their own transparency and a willingness to change.

Understanding Fears

Underlying mental models called schemas, which reflect the basic beliefs we develop about ourselves in early life, tend to frame how we interpret social information.³ For instance, someone who experienced an early betrayal might fear disloyalty and even mistakenly perceive it in others. The strength of one’s schemas, situational factors like stress, and organisational culture all influence the likelihood that derailers will emerge for any individual or leader.

Strategic self-awareness is necessary in overcoming fears. A Harvard Business Review article describes underlying fears as “an active force that drive unproductive behaviors.”⁴ Understanding the extent to which those behavioral characteristics are strengths and the point at which they begin to cause derailment is vital.

Improving Psychological Safety

In addition to overcoming their individual fears, leaders are responsible for establishing psychological safety and mitigating fear within their teams. It’s an ongoing commitment, and these steps will help.

1. Assess – Personality assessment grants a unique and empowering self-knowledge. When leaders don’t understand their specific derailers, they will struggle to know their reputations, or how others perceive them. Leaders who are aware of their reputations can learn to implement behavioural change to enhance their strengths.
2. Acknowledge – Everyone has derailing behaviours, and everyone can improve their performance. Leaders who practice transparency create a foundation for psychological safety. Those who own their behaviours and model openness can repair or reinforce trust: “I’m sorry that I acted annoyed with you this morning. I was afraid of losing control of the project, and I let my temper get away from me.”Personal growth is a cycle of action, acknowledgement, and reflection. Hogan Founder Robert Hogan, PhD, wrote about the importance of reflection in leadership development: “Reflecting on the outcomes of our actions allows us to understand both their consequences and the reasons for behaving that way in the first place. Our analogy is to athletics, where critical feedback on past performance is a constant feature of life, and where mental rehearsal is used to sharpen and enhance future performance.”⁵
3. Adapt – Long-term behavioural modification comes from a leader’s commitment to change. This often involves executive coaching, ongoing feedback from team members, and performance evaluations of interpersonal strategies. Behavioural interventions are more likely to be effective when leaders have addressed the fears that trigger their derailers.⁴ Adaptation can become habitual when leaders successfully learn to interrupt their own patterns of derailment for the good of the team.

It’s important to remember that a leader isn’t one who has all the answers or never makes mistakes. A leader is someone who accomplishes goals by facilitating team performance. As Amy C. Edmondson, author of The Fearless Organization, writes, “The leader’s job is to create and nurture the culture we all need to do our best work. And so anytime you play a role in doing that, you are exercising leadership.”¹

Contact us for more information Get Certified

The post Psychological Safety and the Distant Leader appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

ialign, in partnership with Hogan Assessments, has gathered data from standardised, robust scientifically validated measurements of almost 1000 school leaders over the last decade and this has enabled us to develop an understanding of the key factors affecting principals. These measurements included:

• Motives, Values and Preferences Inventory (MVPI): provides valuable insights into the kind of environment someone is likely to find most motivating, as well as the kind of culture they are likely to cultivate as a leader.
• Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI): a valuable tool for gauging normal day-to-day personality tendencies including insights into their approach to work and interactions with others.
• Hogan Development Survey (HDS): designed to examine tendencies that can emerge when people experience pressure or when their guard is down.

We have gathered valuable insights into the needs, personality characteristics, and leadership styles of Australian school leaders, as well as how they are likely to approach the situations and challenges associated with educational leadership. We have been able to observe what environments they are likely to find most motivating, where their strengths may lie, and what may contribute to some of the challenges they face.

Our research into the nuances of the Hogan Assessment data has enabled us to differentiate what really matters for leaders in schools, in contrast to other measures that generically consider ‘leadership’ across all sectors or industries. By deeply understanding the unique personality, motivators, and drivers of school leaders we can help in identifying strategies to more effectively support them.

The findings in the following section are based on an analysis of data from a sample of 773 Australian school leaders that was conducted by PBC, the Australian distributor of the Hogan assessments and a data sample of 618 school leaders that was conducted by ialign Pty Ltd. This analysis provides detailed insights into how the motivators, personality traits, and potential derailers of Australian school leaders align with the demands of their leadership roles.

Read the white paper here

The post How Do We Motivate, Engage And Retain Educational Leaders? appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

Since the inception of The Science of Personality in 2020, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, and Blake Loepp have done an annual review of news and events that loosely relate to the 11 scales of the HDS. It’s become a fan-favourite episode across the 174 countries where people listen.

A quick disclaimer: We’re connecting the psychological nature of the HDS derailers to real events and notable people. We strive to be objective and don’t intend to condone or condemn the items we mention.

Following are the 2024 derailers of the year.

Excitable: Yoon Suk Yeol

The Excitable scale concerns being passionate about new projects or ideas but also easily frustrated or disappointed. South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law in response to negative public opinion about him. A short time later, he withdrew the declaration and apologised. A short time after that, he seemed to backtrack on his apology for the declaration. This is a quintessential representation of the emotional highs and lows and rash decisions associated with the Excitable derailer.

Sceptical: Joe Rogan

The Sceptical scale refers to mistrusting others. People with high scores on Sceptical tend to question evidence and challenge what’s known. Joe Rogan, a US-based podcaster and self-proclaimed conspiracy theorist, has questioned the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Jr., the authenticity of the moon landing, the efficacy of vaccines, and the existence of UFOs. While it can be beneficial to challenge conventional wisdom, Sceptical people risk doubting facts or spreading misinformation.

Cautious: Democrats

The Cautious scale is about the fear of making a mistake or being embarrassed. Those who score high on Cautious tend to avoid taking risks. The US Democratic Party exhibited this type of caution during the 2024 presidential election. The party convinced President Joe Biden to step down from running and nominated Vice President Kamala Harris to run instead. The Democrats seemed to see Harris as a safer bet and took a less risky path.

Reserved: Bashar al-Assad

The Reserved scale relates to avoiding challenges or confrontation. Another way of describing it is running away from problems. Former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad literally left the country when his government was overthrown. It’d be challenging to appear more Reserved than that.

Leisurely: Drake vs. Kendrick Lamar Feud

The Leisurely scale has to do with passive resistance or dealing with problems in an indirect manner. Rappers Drake and Kendrick Lamar wrote a series of so-called diss tracks, which are filled with indirect inflammatory accusations against each other. The musical feud escalated this year with the diss tracks involving criminal allegations and leading to the injury of one of the musicians’ security guards.

Bold: Raygun

The Bold scale is about overconfidence, entitlement, and unrealistic beliefs about one’s talent. Australian competitive breakdancer Rachael Gunn, whose stage name is Raygun, had a disastrous performance in the 2024 Summer Olympics. Video of her dance went viral on social media, where she received harsh criticism that her talent was not up to Olympic standards.

Mischievous: Luigi Mangione (UnitedHealthcare Suspect)

The Mischievous scale concerns being charming and compelling, as well as being manipulative and rule breaking. Luigi Mangione, who has been charged with murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, exemplifies the dark side of Mischievous (allegedly, at least). An extreme level of rule breaking is violent, criminal behaviour.

Colourful: Moo Deng

The Colourful scale relates to being attention seeking, self-promoting, and dramatic. In the workplace, people who have high Colourful scores want the spotlight to shine on them. Viral sensation Moo Deng, a baby pygmy hippopotamus in Thailand, is more energetic and playful than most hippos. Moo Deng’s rambunctious behaviour, including biting caretakers, has made her the subject of numerous internet memes.

Imaginative: SpaceX

The Imaginative scale is about being creative, sometimes impractically so. It’s being creative in ways that may seem to be ahead of their time or beyond the scope of what’s realistic. US technology company SpaceX launched a rocket booster—and successfully landed it instead of letting it crash into the ocean. This achievement not only saves money (and rockets) but also creatively demonstrates what some believed impossible in space technology.

Diligent: Taylor Swift

The Diligent scale concerns being hard driving, motivated, and perfectionistic. For the second year in a row, singer-songwriter Taylor Swift represents this scale for her 149 Eras Tour shows, 10 million tickets sold, and $2 billion in revenue. She’s said she wants every show to be perfect.

Dutiful: Sunita Williams and Butch Wilmore (Starliner Astronauts)

The Dutiful scale relates to following orders and resisting taking charge. People who are high on Dutiful tend to be disciplined about rules, regulations, and protocol. NASA astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore were supposed to work at the International Space Station for mere days but became stranded due to shuttle problems. By the time they return to Earth, they will have been gone for months. They’ve taken “working late” to a whole new level.

That’s a wrap for the 2024 derailers of the year! Thank you to the listeners of The Science of Personality for making it a fun, fantastic year.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 116 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

*This blog was originally published on Hogan Assessments

The post The 2024 Derailers of the Year appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

Do personality characteristics relate to nightmares? If so, which?

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, and Blake Loepp spoke with returning podcast guest Zlatan Krizan, PhD, professor of psychology at Iowa State University, about the psychology of nightmares.

As a child, Zlatan had a recurring nightmare of a gorilla coming down a hallway toward his bedroom. Within one of these nightmares, he eventually realised he was dreaming and decided to flee the gorilla by jumping out of his bedroom window. He woke up before he landed and never had the dream again.

This article covers what causes nightmares, what happens in the brain during dreams, the difference between nightmares and night terrors, and the impact of personality.

What Causes Nightmares?

Originally, the term nightmare was related to the experience of sleep paralysis. A nightmare was thought to sit on the chest and cause the feeling of being immobilised or suffocated. Today, the term is used to mean bad dreams in general.

“Nightmares are vivid, emotionally dysphoric dreams. They are dreams that tend to be very negative and are usually marked by emotions such as fear, terror, rage, or confusion,” said Zlatan. “Nightmares may wake you up because of the intensity of the emotional responses.”

Nightmares are common. Eighty-five percent of people report having at least one during their lifetime, and five percent report experiencing them weekly. When nightmares occur frequently, they can disrupt sleep and affect daily life.

So, where do nightmares come from? The brain—and our waking lives.

Zlatan described a study following the 1989 San Fransisco earthquake.¹ Researchers compared nightmares occurring before and after the earthquake among people in San Francisco, California, and Tucson, Arizona. People in California had nightmares twice as often as people in Arizona after the earthquake. The closer they were to the epicenter of the earthquake, the more nightmares they had.

Events around us—especially extreme, unexpected traumatic events—drive the experience of nightmares. Nightmares seem to help us deal with emotional load and effective distress. They may also have a greater impact on daytime functioning and emotions in some people more than others.

Dreams and Personality

Personality doesn’t seem to affect the fact of dreaming. Sleep data show that nearly everyone dreams during REM (rapid eye movement) sleep. However, there are large individual differences in whether people remember their dreams, from hardly ever to practically every night. There are also individual differences in how bad dreams affect us.

Aside from traumatic life events, personality characteristics can make certain people more vulnerable to experiencing bad dreams. In terms of the five-factor model, the two personality dimensions that relate most to nightmares are (1) emotional stability and (2) openness to experience. “How sensitive are you to bad dreams? And to what extent would you be able to recall them in the morning?” Zlatan summarised.

People who score low in emotional stability are more likely to report nightmares with a lot of distress. This accords with their propensity toward negative affect, Zlatan explained.

People high in openness to experience are more likely to have frequent dreams in general. They are also more likely to recall their dreams and nightmares. Their imaginative characteristics allow their nightmares to cross from sleeping to waking, especially when associated with intense emotion.

What Happens in the Brain During Nightmares?

REM sleep is a phase of sleep associated with a lot of brain activity. Zlatan called it brain reorganisation, saying that active areas when we are awake become less active and vice versa. During nightmares, brain areas associated with feeling emotions, identifying threats, recognising conflicts or incongruities, and converting short-term memory into long-term memory are all active.

The visual cortex, which is responsible for processing visual information, is also active—but in an unusual way. “The first layer of the visual cortex that processes stimuli coming from the eyes is deactivated, which makes sense. Your eyes are closed. You’re not looking at anything. But the second layer is very active. It’s not processing images you’re seeing. It’s processing images that your brain is generating internally, which helps account for the visual nature of dreams,” Zlatan explained.

Recent theories about nightmares suggest that fear extinction may be a function (that is, eliminating fear-based reactions to negative experiences). Despite their unpleasant nature, nightmares can act as “overnight therapy,” a safe space to revisit bad things in novel ways. Another reason we have nightmares might be to process emotionally salient recent memories. Nightmares may also have a creative function because of the odd or illogical recombination of elements of consciousness.

Night Terrors Vs. Sleep Paralysis

Night terrors, which aren’t caused by dreams, tend to occur during slow-wave sleep when the brain is very unengaged. The sympathetic nervous system will trigger a physiological fight or flight impulse, a panic response, that causes you to startle awake. You might wake up confused, distressed, terrified, or even hyperventilating. Night terrors can relate to stress or anxiety, but they don’t necessarily have a psychological cause.

Sleep paralysis differs from night terrors. During REM sleep, we are actually paralysed. Muscle atonia prevents us from getting up and living out our dreams, and a chemical called glycine blocks our body from responding to any nervous impulses coming from the brain. (People with REM behaviour disorder aren’t paralysed during REM sleep and tend to act out their dreams, which can cause injury.)

To transition from having dreams in REM sleep to being awake, several transitions must occur at the same time. When there is a delay in the restoration of movement, a person can be fully awake but briefly unable to move. “With sleep paralysis, that period gets elongated. You end up having a significant amount of time where in some ways you’re still dreaming, but in other ways you’re awake,” Zlatan said. Nightmares that occur during extended sleep paralysis can cause distress or panic. They often overlap visually with physical surroundings.

The experience of something dark and threatening, a figure that is menacingly but slowly approaching us, is universal in nightmares. The threatening figure might be a shadowy person wearing a hat, a fearsome animal, or a demonic spirit. Over time, the myth of the bogeyman, witch, or spirit is reinforced by stories and artistic representations. Even given cultural differences, the universality of fear underlies this concept. “I will leverage a hypothesis that that we had those experiences [of fear] first due to sleep paralysis,” Zlatan said. The vivid negative emotions, the overlay between the perceived environment and dream consciousness, and the helplessness of atonia—all make sleep paralysis nightmares particularly affecting.

How to Cure Nightmares

“There are usually layers of things that may be driving nightmares that come from life, history, or personality,” Zlatan observed. Other precipitating factors might be a recent stressful period of life. Physical triggers such as alcohol use can also cause nightmares. Stress management can help to lessen the intensity of distressing dreams so they don’t disrupt sleep.

For some people, frequent nightmares may be indicative of nightmare disorder, a type of parasomnia often associated with post-traumatic stress disorder. When nightmares are frequent, seeking medical treatment and therapy to address potential underlying psychological factors can help alleviate nightmares.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 111 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts. Cheers, everybody!

*This article originally appeared on Hogan Assessments.

The post The Psychology of Nightmares appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, and Blake Loepp spoke with Rong Su, PhD, associate professor of management and entrepreneurship and Mahoney Fellow at the University of Iowa, about career successes and inequalities.

Rong is an organisational psychologist who studies individual differences that predict people’s job performance, satisfaction, and success. She discusses individual differences across five factors: (1) career interests, (2) gender, (3) socioeconomic status, (4) personality, and (5) intelligence.

Career Interests

Career interests are the preferences people have for different work activities, occupational fields, or environments. “Interest is a huge driver for people’s career choices,” Rong said. People tend to be attracted to jobs that overlap with their interests. Investigative, social, enterprising, and artistic are all categories of career interest.

Interests are a predictor of income and occupational prestige. Different careers have different levels of income, so interests do affect earnings. Interests drive choices within a career toward different activities, such as research or administration. They also serve as a source of intrinsic motivation that drives performance. “The fit between a person’s interest and their job predicts their level of performance,” Rong said.

For instance, engineers tend to have realistic interests, which include manipulating objects, doing hands-on activities, and solving problems with programming. Enjoyment of this work is likely to create a top performer. “Top individual contributors as an IT professional or as an engineer tend to be promoted to management,” Rong pointed out. “Transitioning from a things-oriented job to a people-oriented job that requires a lot of leading and influencing others creates a misfit and takes some adjustment.”

Gender

Gender roles affect what types of interests some people may have. “Men tend to gravitate towards things-oriented careers on average, and women tend to gravitate towards people-oriented careers on average,” Rong said. On the other hand, the enterprising interest dimension was historically male dominated but now shows no gender difference. (Data for these meta-analyses mainly came from North America within the last several decades.)

What causes these differences in interest across gender? Rong referenced Linda Gottfredson’s theory of circumscription and compromise.¹ The theory suggests that people may restrict their interests within the social, racial, and cultural norms of gender roles. Gender is likely an important factor in how people view what is and isn’t an acceptable interest.

Socioeconomic Status

Socioeconomic status (SES) has a strong influence on career success. “People from higher [socioeconomic] backgrounds do tend to have an advantage in terms of their grades, educational attainment, and career outcomes,” Rong said. SES affects career interests, which affect career choices.

Imagine a scenario in which two girls both have a things-oriented career interest. Now suppose the girls are exposed to different experiences based on socioeconomic status. One girl might visit science and technology museums and become a materials engineer. The other girl might spend time at the family auto body shop after school and become an automotive technician. Early experiences like these shape the work activities people might perform in adulthood.

“How do we cultivate interests so that we help individuals know what careers are possible?” Rong asked. Overcoming socioeconomic barriers involves early intervention. Role models and exposure to different activities help to spark and reinforce career interest across social classes.

Personality

Of course, personality also impacts career success. “Personality matters for job performance,” Rong said. One personality trait on the five-factor model that especially affects performance is conscientiousness. Having high conscientiousness—for instance, a high score on the Hogan Personality Inventory‘s Prudence scale—relates to being hardworking, reliable, organised, and compliant. The other factors also relate to performance, depending on the requirements of the job.

Personality is an important factor in emergent leadership and effective leadership. An emergent leader tends to seem charismatic, seek leadership roles, and be viewed as leaderlike. An effective leader builds and maintains a high-performing team, accomplishing work by means of team performance. Personality, along with career interest, can predict who is likely to gain a leadership role and who is likely to lead effectively.

Intelligence

Comparing intelligence, personality, and interest in predicting various career and educational outcomes, Rong found that intelligence tends to be the most influential factor. It helps predict academic performance, educational attainment, occupational prestige, and even income.

What are the implications in individual differences in intelligence for people of different socioeconomic statuses? There could be three possibilities: (1) Each of these factors could have an independent effect. Interest, gender, SES, personality, and intelligence would not really affect each other. (2) The factors could have a collective or cumulative effect. Intelligence and socioeconomic status, for example, would build on each other. (3) The factors could have an effect based on the resource substitution hypothesis. Intelligence and personality could substitute for or help people catch up from a lower socioeconomic status.

“For the most part, we have found support for the independent effect,” Rong said.² “Individual differences contribute to individuals’ future careers independently. The advantage of SES is always going to be there. Being intelligent and having desirable personality traits like consciousness also give people an advantage. But in some areas, we did find support for the resource substitution effect. For income, conscientiousness and intelligence help people catch up.”

Minimising Inequalities in Career Success

Recognising that these five dimensions may independently contribute to career success can foster a hopeful outlook. If personality and interest outweigh SES, for instance, then efforts such as early educational exposure to different activities may have a big impact. Introducing children to different occupational fields to show what careers are accessible to them is an intervention that truly matters. “We may never eliminate all the inequalities, but the key factor for changing or reducing the gaps is to help people view the world differently and show people what’s possible,” Rong said.

As for minimising inequalities in career success, adverse impact is possible for certain groups when selection and admission decisions use cognitive tests. Rong suggested incorporating noncognitive evaluations—for example, using an interest assessment or personality assessment—to help reduce the likelihood of adverse impact and increase diversity.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 104 of The Science of Personality.

*This post originally appeared on Hogan Assessments

The post Career Success and Inequality appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

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 organisational values. Workers whose values align with those of the organisation feel the greatest job satisfaction, engagement, and belonging. They are more likely to be productive organisational citizens. Meanwhile, those whose values differ will probably feel unfulfilled and may seek work elsewhere.

Before we explore the organisational 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 behaviour: (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 organisations, the shared values of the leadership team create the organisation’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 organisation’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 organisation. 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 emphasises 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 organisations too. Next, we will consider how values impact organisations.

Organisational Impact of Job Satisfaction

Values impact organisations in four main ways: (1) individual motivations, (2) person-organisation alignment, (3) leadership style, and (4) unconscious biases. Organisations that understand this and assess employee values can understand candidates’ likelihood of job satisfaction, motivate and engage employees, improve team cohesion, and describe their organisational 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 organisational 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 organisation’s values. The degree to which employee values align with organisational 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 organisation’s. Alignment also explains how an employee reacts to organisational 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 organisation’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 organisation.”

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 organisation. 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 organisational 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 behaviour 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 organisations, 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.”

*This article originally appeared on Hogan Assessments.

The post Job Satisfaction: What Is a Dream Job, Anyway? appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

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 benefits of imposter syndrome, and how to use it 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 worried 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, it isn’t caused by an absence of resilience.

The Psychology Behind It

Our current understanding of the psychology of imposter syndrome is built on the feminine psychology research of Karen Horney, MD, and research on the imposter phenomenon by Pauline Rose Clance, PhD. “Imposter syndrome is brought about when experiences in childhood are only selectively validated,” Michael explained. During childhood, humans try to gain support, develop a secure identity, and stabilise 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 is rooted in 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 is related 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 sabre-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 behaviour 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, is often misaligned 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 is often a sign of 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 normalise 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.

*This article originally appeared on Hogan Assessments.

The post How Imposter Syndrome Can Improve Performance appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

Recently on The Science of Personality, Christopher J. Duffy, MBA, managing partner at Hogan Assessments, spoke about high-potential employees—a group that organisations spend a tremendous amount of time and resources to define, identify, and develop.

“There is no silver bullet to this equation,” Christopher said. “The most effective high-potential programs usually take considerable resources and support.”

Let’s discuss who high-potential employees are, how to identify them, and how to develop them.

Who Are High Potentials?

When organisations talk about high-potential employees, they usually mean people with the potential for leadership succession. Organisations are looking for people to step into critical upper leadership roles.

The search for successor talent starts with making an accurate evaluation of the readiness that employees show in their current positions. Organisations must effectively prepare and develop those individuals for whatever their destinations might be.

Every organisation has a slightly different definition of what counts as potential, which makes identifying high potentials more complex. To some, the criteria for high potentials are related to workplace politics, reputation, or even a golf handicap. To others, the criteria come from performance metrics and other analytics.

“Multimodal high-potential programs are the most effective,” Christopher said. They tend to combine contextually specific expectations for the future role, as well as clear psychometrics and past performance data. Finding successor talent isn’t a quick or standardised process. Identifying characteristics of high-potential talent to align with organisational needs requires intention.

Personality Characteristics of High Potentials

The specific definition of a high-potential employee differs based on the organisation and role. Nevertheless, our personality data have shown three broad skill groups that help high potentials become successful leaders.

• Functional – A high-potential employee has mastered the core foundational characteristics of following processes and being rewarding to work with.
• Social – A high-potential employee excels at creating and inspiring followership within their group and can self-manage the dark side of charisma.
• Effective – A high-potential employee shows the ability to build and maintain a high-performing team related to their leadership role. They engage and influence that team to achieve collective outcomes.

High potential isn’t just one metric. It’s a combination of characteristics related to job competence, socioemotional skills, and team performance.

How to Identify High Potentials

Ideally, a successful high-potential program would begin with psychometric data from the Hogan assessments. A multimodal approach brings personality data into the discussion for individual development. It adds scientific rigor to what has traditionally been a subjective process.

“If you can put the assessment as part of the identification process at the front end, it can be a fantastic way to make sure that you’re not missing something,” Christopher said. Organisations might fail to identify high potentials, especially if they seem quiet. Excellent high potentials can sometimes get passed over because they may not have a strong drive for self-promotion. Organisations might also misidentify high potentials, especially if they seem loud. People who act charismatic can sometimes lack the leadership skills to succeed in strategic roles.

Even if the pool of high potentials is already predetermined or fixed, Hogan assessment data are extremely beneficial. Psychometric data effectively identify gaps that could emerge as high potentials advance along the leadership track. Organisations should identify a targeted, personalised plan to address each high potential’s specific development needs. “The most effective component of the high-potential program is making sure we have a clear plan for what to do next with these individuals and really help them prepare for that destination role,” Christopher added.

Goals and Mistakes of High-Potential Programs

“Leaders are able to adapt through strategic self-awareness to ensure they’re effective,” Christopher said. “We need high potentials to be able to recognise and understand where they might have to flex their natural style to be most successful.”

High potentials who may have low social energy might nevertheless build reputations as connected leaders by going out of their way to be present with their teams, making specific efforts to build cross-departmental relationships, and being mindful about how they solicit and implement feedback. A high-potential program shouldn’t convert everyone into an extravert; instead, it should create awareness of how successful leaders show up in their organisation.

Where high-potential programs go wrong is a lack of long-term focus and direction. Putting too much effort into identification and too little effort into development will not yield a successful outcome. “I encourage clients to think along a three- to five-year horizon for developing high-potential employees,” Christopher said. He also challenged organisations to define a clear, transparent path for a future leader’s advancement to reduce turnover at higher levels of seniority.

How to Develop High-Potential Employees

A good high-potential program is a process, not an event. “At Hogan, we’re in the business of assessing individuals and providing them with insights around who they are, how they lead, and how they can develop. The worst thing you can do is put those insights on the shelf and forget about them,” Christopher said. Personality insights are extremely relevant throughout a person’s entire career—but especially when they are making transitions.

A high-potential program ought to be a long-term development program that continually reinforces the insights that were created through the high-potential identification process. Developing high-potential employees also tends to be successful when peers are encouraged to collaborate. Peer development can help high potentials stop viewing each other as competitors and invest in each other’s progress.

Insights for Coaching High Potentials

Having a certified Hogan coach is essential to help high potentials realise they will likely need to evolve or change. “High potentials think more of the same will produce results,” Christopher said, calling that belief a common mistake. Being conscientious, detail oriented, and hardworking brought high potentials success and recognition to a certain point in their careers. Those skills may not serve them well as successor talent, though. Leaders need to think strategically, learn to delegate, and understand their new scope and scale.

“Strategic self-awareness is absolutely critical for individuals to make that bridge to doing things in a different manner,” Christopher said. High potentials need coaching to help them deconstruct what has worked for them in the past and think differently about how to evolve or change their approach in the future. Leaders who are effective know when to resist their natural tendencies and apply different behavioural strategies to benefit their teams.

Organisations must provide ongoing development for a high-potential program to be effective. “The advice I leave with our audience is there is no one-size-fits-all for high potentials. I fully believe in being mindful of the programs that you create,” Christopher said.

Listen to this conversation in full on episode 101 of The Science of Personality. Never miss an episode by following us anywhere you get podcasts.

*This article originally appeared on Hogan Assessments.

The post How to Develop High-Potential Employees appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

People Skills: Can This Person Get Along with Others?

People are social creatures, which means hiring managers should consider a fundamentally human question during employee selection: will this candidate be rewarding to work and spend time with? Although this question is simple, it is often overlooked. Employers are often enticed by bright candidates. But when these people are incapable of getting along with others, or at least unwilling, they tend to erode organizational morale.

Tech guru Steve Jobs is a great example of someone who, despite being admired for his intelligence and creativity, was emotionally taxing to work with.² His inability to get along with others was apparent from the start of his career. During his stint at Atari, his employers assigned him to the solitary night shift so he would stop upsetting his coworkers. Atari cofounder Nolan Bushnell later said that Jobs “was very often the smartest guy in the room, and he would let people know that.”³ Jobs was suspicious, argumentative, entitled, impulsive, prone to setting impossible standards, and emotionally volatile. He did not value people skills, which curbed his ability to get along with people throughout the ranks. Workers at Pixar and Apple both admitted that working with Jobs required inhabiting an almost egoless state because they were subject to constant abuse and expected to be extremely deferential. Although his genius made him successful, his harsh behavior prevented him from becoming CEO at Apple and eventually resulted in his ousting from the company.

Organizations may clamour to have a genius in their ranks, but focusing on candidates with strong people skills is more beneficial. The majority of today’s leaders are people leaders managing employees with team-based jobs.⁴ When folks who occupy these leadership positions lack the necessary people skills, productivity can plummet. For the sake of those already working within the organization, employers should ensure their employee selection processes place people skills at the heart of the search.

Learning Skills: Can This Person Do the Job?

The accelerated development of new technologies means professionals must pursue education to improve at their jobs and adapt to the business world’s ever-shifting terrain. Hiring managers should look for candidates who display, in addition to occupational expertise, a high degree of inquisitiveness and a propensity for learning. Even at the C-suite level, learning skills should not be taken for granted. As Steven Berglas, PhD, points out in The Perils of Accentuating the Positive, “super smart and capable people” often “fail to use their abilities to continually adapt and instead resist new information when it is obvious that the old way is working against them.”⁵

Berglas illustrates this refusal to adapt with the story of Sewell Avery, the CEO and chairperson of the department store retailer Montgomery Ward & Co. Prior to his time at the helm of Montgomery Ward, Avery was CEO of the United States Gypsum Company. Having come of age in the depressed 1890s, Avery applied the economic attitudes of his youth to his business by running his company frugally and keeping it debt-free. This approach paid off when the Great Depression arrived. Many of Avery’s competitors were forced to close their doors, but the United States Gypsum Company continued to grow. J.P. Morgan was so impressed with Avery’s leadership that he asked him to take charge of the ailing Montgomery Ward & Co. department store. Avery remained steadfast to his frugal formula throughout the post-World War II economic boom. His approach was so inflexible that, despite warnings from his subordinates, he refused to follow consumers and open stores in the suburbs. His reasoning was that another Great Depression would arrive soon, but it never did. Consequently, Montgomery Ward & Co. fell behind its competitors and never caught up. If Avery had stayed curious and kept learning about the changing market, Montgomery Ward might still be around today.

Regardless of a job’s context, learning skills and openness to new experiences are valuable competencies. Employee selection procedures should focus on candidates who are willing to resist clinging to tried-and-true methods and instead flex their learning abilities. The recent changes wrought by COVID-19 have served as a reminder of the importance of approaching new business environments, organizational and team structures, and social situations with a healthy dose of curiosity and openness.

Work Ethic: Can This Person Be Motivated to Do the Job?

Socially skilled, bright, and adaptable candidates can still fail to fulfill their promise if they are not motivated to work hard. Motivation is formed by personal values that impact career outcomes. If a candidate does not buy into the vision for their role or the company, their work ethic is bound to lag in the long run. Therefore, hiring managers should look for an overlap between candidate and organizational values. A fictitious but helpful example of what happens when employees aren’t motivated can be found in the character Stanley Hudson in the American version of the TV series, The Office.

Although stone-faced Stanley has a history of hitting high sales numbers with Dunder Mifflin Paper Company, he no longer musters the energy to do anything beyond his immediate job description. Stanley’s recurring catch lines are “no” and “do not care.” He refuses to coach younger employees such as Ryan, always leaves the office at 5 p.m. sharp, takes naps during the workday, and does crossword puzzles during meetings. The show makes the reason for his disengagement clear: Stanley does not buy into the vision that his boss Michael presents to his employees. In season 2, Stanley vents his frustration to Michael:

What is wrong with you? Do you have any sense at all? Do you have any idea how to run an office? Every day you do something stupider than you did the day before. And I think, “There’s no possible way he can top that.” But what you do you do? You find a way, damn it, to top it. You are a professional idiot!

The clash between Stanley and Michael becomes a running storyline in the show. Stanley’s disengagement eventually climaxes in season 5, when he has a heart attack due to stress from working in an environment he does not enjoy. Stanley returns to the office with a stress monitor that goes off whenever Michael approaches him. Although fictional, Stanley’s disengagement and resulting health issues are based in reality. According to a Gallup poll, 71% of Americans do not like their jobs and therefore do not work hard or show loyalty to their employers.⁶ Moreover, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health shows that people who work for employers with whom they don’t agree are at higher risk for cardiovascular disease and other health issues.⁷

Alignment with organizational values will almost certainly affect employee engagement with work, as well as health. In turn, job engagement and health affect whether employees work hard in their roles. Educational psychologist Lee Cronbach summed it up best when he said, “If for each environment there is a best organism, for each organism there is a best environment.”⁸

Success in Employee Selection: A Matter of Good Data and Perspective

While reviewing candidates and what they each have to offer, it is helpful to use these three competencies as a big-picture barometer of hiring success. Understanding where each candidate stands in terms of these criteria helps employers make the best hiring decisions possible, plus anticipate areas that might require special attention or training.

*This article originally appeared on Hogan Assessments.

The post 3 Skills to Guide Employee Selection appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

When job interviews are at their best, they can be used to assess whether someone’s skills, experiences, and other key characteristics are aligned with the job, which allows for better hiring decisions. This makes the interview a powerful tool for selection. However, the problem is that all interviews are not created equal.

Bias and Error in Job Interviews

When interviews aren’t designed well, bias and error can impact judgments made in the interview.^1,2 An interviewer who has a more favourable impression of the candidate, for example, will likely ask fewer questions compared to applicants for whom they have less favourable impressions.³ In addition, an interviewer’s opinion of an applicant can show through nonverbal communication, affecting the candidate’s responses.⁴ These errors, among others, can provide some candidates with an advantage or disadvantage over others. For example, the candidate who is asked more questions has more opportunities to show strengths or potential weaknesses.

One way to mitigate some of the potential for error in interviews is to consider the structure of the interview.⁵ Interviews fall on a spectrum between being unstructured and structured. Those that are unstructured typically follow a more organic or conversational approach. Using this approach, the interviewer asks questions they believe fit the requirements of the job. The interviewer may or may not provide a rating of the candidate’s responses to the questions. Interviewers adopting an unstructured approach likely don’t ask every candidate the same questions and think of questions as the interview progresses.

Unstructured Interviews

This unstructured way of interviewing is common in organisations. One reason for this is that an interviewer gets to ask the questions they think are relevant to the job. If you provide an interviewer with a set of questions beforehand and ask them to “stick to the script,” they might think the list of questions is missing important components of the job. Another reason interviewers might favour the unstructured approach is because they can ask candidates questions they believe are relevant to each person.

These reasons might seem to justify unstructured interviews, but they can create problems. While interviewers might want to ask questions relevant to the job, some of their perceptions about what is required could be erroneous. For example, interviewers might assume a candidate should have a certain skill prior to being hired for a job. But it is also possible someone who learns that skill on the job will perform equally as well as an incumbent employee who entered the job with that skill.

Another example could be an interviewer who has a preconceived notion about psychology majors lacking business savvy. This might lead the interviewer to hold an overall negative impression of an applicant with a psychology degree. The interviewer might be inclined to ask that candidate more questions about business yet ask fewer business questions of a candidate with a business degree. This is unfair. Worse, this overall negative impression could be communicated indirectly or even nonverbally, causing a negative reaction from the candidate.

These are just a couple of examples of how bias and errored thinking can influence the unstructured interview process and why it could be helpful to consider a more structured interview.

Structured Interviews

In contrast to unstructured interviews, highly structured interviews are typically guided by questions planned beforehand. The questions themselves are based on the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) that have been proven to be related to the job. The questions are typically asked in the same order for every candidate, and the rating options for each question are anchored with behaviours the ratings represent. Structuring the interview in these ways helps to mitigate some of the biased decision-making and other problems associated with the more conversational approach of unstructured interviews.⁶ When each candidate gets the same opportunity to respond to the same questions, the outcome of the interview is less associated with the structure of the interview itself and more with what you are trying to measure in the interview.

So, using structured interviews can be an effective way to assess whether someone will meet the requirements for the job. Each interview question is directly related to the job, each candidate has the same opportunity to answer the questions, and the interviewer has a clear and unambiguous way to rate each applicant. Using this type of interview gives our psychology major and our business major the same chance to be rated fairly.

Making the Most Out of Your Selection Process

While structured interviews are a great tool to use in hiring decisions, the interview is not the only tool you should use in your selection process. Valid, reliable personality tests are another tool that can add value to talent acquisition. Numerous studies have shown that personality is a key component for determining if someone will be a strong performer.⁷ Other research has demonstrated that gauging personality in interviews is challenging and can result in inaccurate assessment of someone’s personality.⁸ Hogan provides quality personality tests, which can be combined with an interview to better assess whether someone will be a good fit for the job.

If you have any questions about how personality tests can be used in conjunction with your job interview, feel free to reach out to our team.

This blog post was authored by Hogan Consultant Mark Shoemaker, MA.

*This article was originally published by Hogan Assessments.

The post Getting the Most Out of Your Job Interviews appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.