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.

The Characteristics of a Competitive Personality

Ambition is a personality characteristic measured with the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI). The HPI assesses the bright side of personality, or the everyday strengths that influence how we present ourselves at our best. Ambition refers to our energy and drive. It measures the degree to which someone seems socially self-confident, leaderlike, competitive, and energetic.

Similar to competition itself, the HPI Ambition scale is intrinsically neither good nor bad. Someone with a low score on the Ambition scale might prefer to belong on a team or lead from behind—effective in many circumstances. Someone with a high score on the Ambition scale might become overfocused on their own advancement or achieving results—ineffective in many circumstances.

Many people, even psychologists, prefer to minimize the fact of ambition. In cultures that value humility or group consensus, admitting you want to get ahead of others might seem tactless, arrogant, or embarrassing. At Hogan, we recognize that getting ahead is an integral part of human nature and can even help predict workplace performance. In roles where getting ahead is a key skill, someone with a competitive personality will tend to do a better job.³

Workplace competition is universal. The workplaces themselves aren’t the cause of why we compete at work, though. People are the common factor in all work environments everywhere. Something fundamental exists in human nature that motivates us to compete.

Competition in the workplace can produce outcomes that are positive, negative, or a complex mixture. The desire to get ahead of others can carry us to unparalleled heights of innovation, productivity, and success. Yet it can destroy the reputations of individuals, teams, and organizations. And it can do both simultaneously.

Robert Hogan, PhD, founder and president of Hogan Assessments, says that people have always competed for power, defined as status and the control of resources. Today, much of that competition takes place not in nomadic groups seeking subsistence but in the professional context of businesses and organizations. “The fundamental dynamic of organizational life is the individual search for power,” Dr. Hogan said. Understanding why we compete at work can help us direct our innate drive to succeed.

Read on to discover why we compete, the types of workplace competition, and what makes a competitive personality.

The entrepreneurial economy may feel like a new frontier, but it may have a dark side.

Peter Harms, PhD, professor of management at the University of Alabama’s Culverhouse College of Business, spoke about two trends: (1) the shift toward an entrepreneurial economy and (2) the increase in mental health disorders. Peter discussed some of his recent research about how the entrepreneurial economy may have a dark side for mental health, particularly for younger generations.

Before committing to a psychometric tool, employers should get a peek under the hood and ensure that they have a basic understanding of how personality tests work. The assessment industry is unregulated, which means it’s flooded with tests that promise more than they can deliver. Being informed can help you avoid introducing the psychometric equivalent of snake oil into your organization. This article will explain the key areas employers should focus on when trying to understand the nuts and bolts of personality tests.

Business leadership can be just as challenging as elite athletics. In both, strategic performance relies on mindset and personality characteristics.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, chief science officer, and Blake Loepp, PR manager, spoke with Barry Roche, founder and CEO at RSG Consulting, about the role that personality plays in strategic performance.

Barry’s service in the British Royal Marine Commandos taught him the value of adaptability, physical and mental resilience, and a sense of humor. It also gave him his interest in psychology. With more than two decades of experience building organizations across industries, Barry has seen how important human performance is to business success. “The big problems in businesses always come with people attached,” he said.

There’s never a dull moment as we consider the future of work. A major driver behind the Great Resignation is an increase in job openings, as strange as that may seem. And the phenomenon recently called quiet quitting has been around a lot longer than TikTok itself.

Recently on The Science of Personality, cohosts Ryne Sherman, PhD, chief science officer, and Blake Loepp, PR manager, chatted about two hot topics affecting organizations and the global workforce: the Great Resignation and quiet quitting.

There is great value in using well-validated 360 and personality assessments to help enhance your self-awareness and development. While both types of assessments provide valuable insights regarding a your strengths and opportunities when used alone, they are particularly powerful when used together as part of coaching or development conversations. The 360 assessment provides useful information on your performance and reputation at a given point in time, while personality assessments help to explain what may be driving certain behaviours.

Drawing on recent research examining the results of over 2,500 leaders with matched 360 and personality data, this article summarises some key insights on the association between personality and 360 performance. Considerations for leaders wishing to enhance their performance and reputation are also included.

Robert Hogan

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

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

Odata cu declararea starii de urgenta si implementarea recomandarilor de distantare sociala, multi dintre noi resimtim acut izolarea sociala. Si este normal, deoarece oamenii sunt prin natura lor, fiinte sociale.

Psihologul Matthew Lieberman a declarat ca nevoia noastra de conexiune sociala este la fel de fundamentala ca nevoia de apa si mancare. In timpuri stravechi, a fi parte dintr-un grup sau trib era esential pentru supravietuire. Astfel, conform teoriilor psihologiei evolutioniste, nevoia de conectare sociala a fost transmisa genetic ca un mecanism fundamental de supravietuire.

Astfel, nu ne surprinde faptul ca reducerea conectarii sociale are un impact asupra echilibrului emotional si asupra sanatatii psihologice. Iar acestea, la randul lor, impacteaza semnificativ eficienta la locul de munca.