Hey, you know me – right? I mean, if we were to bump into each other on the street you’d be able to say to yourself that you know me. You may not know all about me, but you have a general sense of who I am, right? Now what about if you were to be hired by my employer tomorrow, and we bumped into each other in the hallways in Richmond? Would you feel as confident that you know me? Or would there be a niggling doubt that perhaps, just perhaps, Kirk at work is not like Kirk at all.
Some people really do act differently at work, both in how they approach people and problems. Some people pride themselves on being able to have two disparate personalities: the work Kirk and the home Kirk. I imagine salespeople must do this or they’d be shunned from society permanently – but I digress.
My company decided that they wanted to get to know me – I mean the real me. Not the professional me, nor the home me but the real me. Naturally they turned to psychology – who wouldn’t? They asked that I fill out a personality index called the Hogan Personality Index (HPI) such that they could then figure out how best to plan my career within their maternal fold. I mean, why bother sending a person to loads of management training and promoting them if they have no desire or capability to be a good manager? Makes good fiscal sense, right?
Only if you believe the power of the HPI. Some people acquaint these things with hocus-pocus astrology while others swear by it.
When I received my results (after months of being told they were being analyzed and prepped for my consumption) I have to say that I felt like I had been given some secret insight into who I am in a corporate world. The multiple choice questions in the test were simple enough but I’m familiar with how these things can really pick up trends and whatnot using this simple format. They’re crafty those psychology folk. So I read it over anxiously, wondering what my future held now that I had an Oracle’s insight into what I should do in the company. Then I started to really think about the results: some of them rang quite true while others – not so much.
But the point here is that I want to share the results with you in a kind of a cathartic exorcism – this is not the real me. I defy it, I will surpass it, it will not pin me down.
Phew, I feel better already – thanks!
This is really interesting. Now is this for your own information, for your own development? Or is your comapny going to use the results in considering your career advancements?
Did I read that correctly? That you need to be more concerned with diplomacy and realize others might be more stressed out then you? I agree some seem to be true others not so much.
I have never taken one of these tests but in preparing to enter the corporate world was warned that I might have to take one. I was told it’s pretty straight forward to fake this by looking at what the job description entails and filling out the test by responding not honestly but how a person would best fill that job description. Do you think you could take the test and score high in all categories by role playing somebody your not?
Let’s see here:
1) McKesson would not go to the expense (and yes, I have no doubt they paid honsomely for every one of these) of the report simply to not use it. They had us finish this test as well as another compentency test at the same time. They are planning on ensuring two things with these tests. First, that everyone is clear on what their job entails and the skills required to do it correctly. Second to ensure that anyone who wants to get better at their job knows exactly what they need to do. This could include Hogan results or it could include a gap analysis between their current skillset and the one layed out through the competency test.
2) The company provided it to me as a means of helping me develop a career goal within McKesson. I have no doubt that the copy my manager received will also help her understand how to best guide me in my work – I’m easily bored so she knows she needs to keep that in mind and continue to either push me to stick to it or keep throwing interesting things my way. It’s a tool that I think will be helpful for managers and employees alike.
3) I think you’re mostly right about the results. Some of it is bang on. Some of it seems a little off. But interestingly the weaknesses it points out surfaced in my annual review earlier this year. So apparently I do have something to work on in the interpersonal communication arena. Deep down inside I know that’s partially true – and it gives me clear goals as to how I can improve.
4) I don’t think you can fake this in the manner you suggested. It is 120 multiple choice questions that you cannot go back and review. They ask similar questions that are designed to cross-check your responses for consistency, and that is incorporated into the results. The questions are not clearly defined as “Motivation-related” or “Communication-related”. I think you took psych at UBC right? They can hide these kinds of things in the question quite nicely.
5) What benefit is there in lying on this thing? It is designed as and is being used as a tool to help me understand what I do now, what strengths I have and what things I should work on – why lie? On top of that you may notice that there is no “Good” result and no “Bad” result. The scales present different types of characteristics that can be good or bad in various jobs. You can fake I suppose if you’re very careful, but you’re faking to become B when there was nothing wrong with A. What’s the point? However McKesson has also started having prospective employees take the exam – I’m sure the results are taken into account at some point as to team-fit and management style. As I’m becoming more awware of management issues I know that this kind of info on my direct-reports would be useful to say the least. Naturally some experience with managing people could give me the ability to ferret this out myself over time, but knowing it from the get-go has some value.
I think I answered them all?
I agree this could have value to both you and your management to try and keep you happy and productive. Was this made a requirement or could you have passed on it?
I guess my concern with some thing like would be how it could be misused or potentially misinterpreted. It says you would do better doing research…what if you don’t want to do research and want to go into management? In reviewing potential candidates for a new mangerial position could they turn you down and say “well look at your results, maybe you go into research”? It doesn’t seem to gauge how you willing you would to go outside your comfort zone to push yourself. It is a personality test, chances are likely if you don’t like say public speaking now, that you still won’t like public speaking 5 years from now. But if you push yourself and take as many opportunities as you can to do public speaking you will become better at it. Is this situation taken into account in the test?
I guess the point with faking the test would to get the job or promotion. I agree, you would probably do yourself a disservice by putting yourself in that situation. I had read that it is easy to fake, but never having seen one I was curious if this is true.
I don’t think I ever thought of this exam as optional.
But your concern is certainly a valid one, though perhaps for a reason other than what you state. If you are worried that this would be used against you – to limit your options, then there’s a bigger problem at your company. Where do you work again? Let’s call it Johnson & Johnsons. If J&J hires you, are you a warm body filling a role or you a unique person with strengths that can be used to make a better company/product? If the J&J wants to use this kind of test to restrict your options then I’d say they’re doing bad business – what kind of employee would stick around for a company that is trying to limit employee options?
I’m actually thrilled with how McKesson is using these things. They’re carefully defining the positions and then pointing out what skills are required to succeed in a role. Then then let you see how you score on these types of tests, and offer you any training you want in order to support your career goals. I don’t want to toot their horn but really – what more could you ask for from an employer?
If J&J wants to use these things in a different manner, that’s fine. I value McKesson’s approach and that translates into tangible returns for them. Company loyalty should not be dismissed. However it seems like you’re suspicious – whether that is a reflection of J&J’s corporate climate or previous experience on your part I don’t know. But just like any other tool, it really is just that – a tool. J&J and McKesson should use it as best they can.