admin

“Femeile sunt mai empatice si de aceea mai bune in a conduce oameni”. „Barbatii sunt mai dominanti, mai carismatici, au mai multa forta si de aceea ei ar trebui sa se afle in varful ierarhiilor”. „Femeile trebuie sa isi asume mai mult rolul traditional de mama si sotie”. „Barbatii trebuie sa aduca bani, sa aiba un statut social mai inalt si sa ofere stabilitate in familie”.

De cate ori se iveste ocazia de a discuta despre subiectul femei versus barbati in business si mai ales despre femei si barbati aflati la conducere, am auzit asumptiile de mai sus, dar si multe altele in plus. Brusc, pare ca toata lumea devine experta si are o opinie ferma cu privire la cine ar trebui sa se afle la conducere, cu privire la rolul femeii si al barbatului in societate.

Performanta unei organizatii depinde, in mare masura, de performanta contributorilor individuali. De aceea, este crucial sa angajam oamenii potriviti. Dar cum ne putem da seama daca procesul nostru de selectie identifica cu adevarat persoanele potrivite?  

We’re excited to announce that Dr. Robert Hogan was given the 2020 RHR International Award for Excellence in Consulting Psychology at the Society of Consulting Psychology (SCP) annual conference on February 8 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

The award is granted to individuals who epitomize the standards of excellence that RHR and the SCP seek to perpetuate. Dr. Hogan received the award in recognition of his distinguished career and his significant contributions to the practice of consulting psychology.

The English philosopher Gilbert Ryle famously distinguished between two forms of knowing. The first involves knowing that something is the case and concerns factual knowledge; the second involves knowing how to do something and concerns procedural knowledge.

Organizational psychologists know that there is a right way and a wrong way to choose people who can perform well in specific jobs. Moreover, there is no difference, in principle, between the method for choosing good CEOs and the method for choosing good janitors—although the consequences of choosing a bad CEO are much more severe than the consequences of choosing a bad janitor. However, tested knowledge and proven methods for making good selection decisions are all but ignored when it comes to how CEOs are hired.

A friend of ours, an expert in employee selection, consulted with a franchise in the National Basketball Association. To his dismay they hired player after player based on technical ability, and each of these players was subsequently released—at great cost—for reasons of bad conduct. We asked our friend why the franchise owners ignored his hiring advice, and he said, “There is so much money and ego involved in these decisions that no one cares what I think.” Much the same sentiment seems to apply in the process of selecting CEOs. CCL’s research on executive selection confirms that little rigor is used when appointing top leaders.

CEO selection is prone to three recurring problems.

Globalization and the expansion of organizations across international borders have created opportunities and challenges for current and future leaders. As a consultant, psychologist, and coach, I am excited to see more organizations around the world investing in psychometric and multi-rater feedback data for leadership development.

Having reputational data available can be tremendously helpful to leaders for understanding and narrowing down key areas to focus on for development. Many multi-rater assessments allow leaders to compare themselves to other leaders around the world using global benchmark scores (for example, the Hogan 360°, powered by PBC, does this). Having the ability to use benchmarks to understand how leaders differentiate themselves is great, considering how globally connected we are. But given how diverse we are from country to country and culture to culture, are we missing any critical nuances that need to be considered when supporting our leaders and managers in their development?

Do You Really Know Your People?

Understanding the ins and outs of personality psychology could be the key to unlocking success up and down your organization.

By Robert Hogan, Ph.D., and Ryne A. Sherman

People are the deadliest invasive species in the history of Earth. They have the potential to kill every living thing, and in some cases have already done so. RIP passenger pigeons, western black rhinos, and great auks.

Given the frightful potential of people, then, it might be useful to know something about them. Personality psychology is the “go-to” discipline for understanding people.

But what does it tell us about human nature? Well, the answer depends on who you ask.

Este ambiţios, carismatic, perfecţionist, arogant şi absorbit de propria persoană – acestea ar fi trăsăturile „întunecate” ale personalităţii liderilor români, care au preluat, poate chiar prea bine, o tipologie occidentală de leadership, cea a liderului carismatic- narcisist. Studiile recente arată însă că organizaţiile care vor să aibă performanţă trebuie să renunţe la categoria de lideri carismatici şi să aducă la conducere lideri caracterizaţi de modestie, spune Robert Hogan, unul dintre cei mai influenţi psihologi americani.

„A venit vremea să spu­­nem adio pe­rioa­dei de leader­ship caris­matic. Caris­ma şi narcisis­mul unui lider distrug motivaţia angajaţilor, iar acest lucru se reflectă negativ în rezultatele financiare ale companiilor. În schimb, studiile arată că liderii modeşti, care se ocupă de dezvoltarea echipelor şi care au o atitudine prin care arată că depun eforturi în fiecare zi pentru a-şi merita jobul sunt cei care au cele mai bune rezultate şi cei mai motivaţi angajaţi“, a spus Robert Hogan, 82 de ani, un influent psiholog american, cunoscut pentru că a creat instrumente de evaluare a personalităţii angajaţilor folosite de companii pentru a recruta şi a promova angajaţii potriviţi. El a fost prezent la Bucureşti, în cadrul unui eveniment organizat firma de consultanţă în resurse umane Hart Consulting, care a adus pe piaţa locală instrumentele Hogan Assesments.

Brash bigwigs used to get the glory, but then they started cratering companies.
Now the next great leaders look a whole lot more selfless.

By Robert Hogan, Ph.D., Ryne Sherman, Ph.D., and Scott Gregory, Ph.D.

The research is now crystal clear: Three psychological concepts—charisma, narcissism, and humility—impact leadership. Each is strongly correlated to leadership effectiveness and organization success.

So which concept should you choose? Before you pick, let’s dig into each.

Any company that uses reaction time tests to make personnel decisions is fooling itself. These game-like measures simply don’t measure much at all.

You might see this article as an attack on your business practice. Maybe you’ll even find it an affront to your livelihood. I don’t mean to offend, just to tell the truth.

A few years ago, on the promise of revolutionizing the employment screening industry, two companies began using laboratory tasks borrowed from the field of cognitive psychology to accomplish two things: assess individual differences in personality and use the results to help companies make personnel decisions. It’s a tribute to their sales and marketing departments that these organizations are still in business.

This article concerns three issues: First, it describes the reaction time-based cognitive psychological measures these companies use. Second, it shows how the businesses market their products in misleading ways. And finally, it explains why reaction time measures of personality can’t predict the kinds of outcomes employers care about, like job performance, turnover, and workplace safety.