*This article was authored by Hogan Chief Science Officer Ryne Sherman

A critical task for leaders is to ensure that their followers are working efficiently toward the organization’s goals. In business, employees whose work is aligned with the organization’s objectives are more productive. So-called “performance management processes” are intended to create alignment between the employee’s work and the organization’s goals. A typical performance management process might include planning and setting goals, monitoring progress toward those goals, development and improvement, and periodic performance appraisals (or reviews). These performance management processes could be substantially improved by the use of personality assessments.

The British Psychological Society (BPS) has completed a test review of the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Assessments’ flagship assessment that describes normal personality. The 15-month process concluded with the HPI receiving perfect four-star ratings in the Documentation, Reports and User Experience categories.

De ce avem nevoie de 360 feedback?

Organizatiile folosesc evaluarile de tip 360 pentru dezvoltarea liderilor si pentru evaluarea performantelor echipelor. Feedback-ul 360 reprezinta un punct de plecare in dezvoltarea abilitatilor de leadership. Rezultatele sunt valoroase pentru ca ofera informatii culese intr-o forma standardizata si sub protectia anonimatului de la mai multe grupuri de respondenti (manager direct, egali, subordonati) si reprezinta un pas important in gestionarea reputatiei si a performantei manageriale intr-o organizatie. Pentru a obtine rezultate relevante, conteaza cum sunt selectati respondentii asa incat sa fi avut suficient de multa expunere la interactiunea cu participantul, transparenta in comunicarea scopului si a etapelor procesului de evaluare, precum si oferirea de feedback de catre participant in legatura cu actiunile de dezvoltare pe care a ales sa le urmareasca in viitor.

The personality assessment industry has experienced exponential growth in recent years. Once a common tool for selection purposes, assessments have significantly increased in popularity in the learning and development community.

People are your competitive advantage. In a business environment where most companies have access to the same resources and technology, successful companies must differentiate themselves from the competition. By using assessments, organizations can effectively identify employees’ work strengths, shortcomings, and core values, ensuring you get the most from your employees, and they get the most out of their careers.

Războiul talentelor continuă indiferent de trendurile pieţei, de raportul de forţe dintre cererea şi oferta în piaţa forţei de muncă. Deşi există un număr mare de specialişti, profesionişti, manageri în piaţă, organizaţiile se lupta încă acerb pentru cel mai de preţ atu: talentul.

Ce putem face pentru a asigura o cultură bazată pe atragerea, dezvoltarea, retenţia şi promovarea talentelor în organizaţie? De unde începe această cultură?

Deseori, clienții Hart Consulting solicită suport în identificarea angajaților cu potențial înalt. Acest material a fost realizat în folosul clienților noștri. Identificarea corectă a talentelor este un proces crucial pentru succesul unei organizații. Studii recente arată faptul că organizațiile care au o pepinieră de talente bine dezvoltată au de 13 ori mai multe șanse de a avea rezultate superioare decât competitorii lor.

In June, an article in Time magazine delved into the use of assessments in employee selection. It wasn’t the first time the mainstream media has found a story in assessments, and it probably won’t be the last. The article added some interesting thoughts to the ongoing dialogue, providing examples of companies that use assessments and why they believe in the tools and tying the use of assessments to the growing Big Data trend in business. However, it also reiterated much of what’s been said before, including the common lament that assessments are a “black box” and that relying on this kind of data is somehow more fraught with the potential for error than relying on other selection tools, such as in-person interviews.