Growth Resources - User contributions [en]

Row Results

2026-08-31T20:14:21Z

Flc: /* Results Data */

=Introduction=
[[File:U23 W8+ 3-2.jpg|right|thumb|500px]]
This page provides information about a study we conducted at GRI to analyze the results of the USA U23 Women 8+ team at the 2016 World Rowing Championships in Rotterdam, Netherlands. The overall purpose of the study is to 1) confirm that the 2016 USA Women U23 8+ team's results stand out and 2) provide insights from which we can learn in rowing, other sports, and business.

=An Unprecedented Victory=

According to our analysis, the 2016 USA Women U23 8+ team achieved the largest winning margin in all 8+ events at the Senior and U23 levels since 1977, including men, women, and the Olympic level. This is a monumental achievement in rowing, setting a new world record.

Conditions in rowing can vary significantly from race to race, but the margin between the first and second boats provides an accurate assessment of how well the winning boat performed. A winning margin of 7.16 seconds for the 2016 USA Women U23 8+, when on average, U23 and Senior confounded is 2.05 seconds, in a sport where a millisecond can make a difference, is simply astounding. As we have continued to track results since we started this study, this achievement has not been surpassed yet. The number of factors at play that impact results is numerous, starting well before the race, and including human factors that, by nature, are hard to capture.

=Origin of the Study=

The study started in 2023, with the conjunction of watching rowing races in Chile at the Pan-American Games, where one of my daughters, Colette, coaxed the US mixed boat to a substantial margin, and seeing Jean-Christophe Rolland, the President of the International Rowing Federation, awarding medals. Rolland is best known for the Sydney 2000 Olympics victory in the pair with Michel Andrieux, when he made a crucial call of just three words "pour nos enfants" (for our children) that instantly sparked their decisive win<Ref>See here the book: Searle, G. (2012). If Not Now, When?: One Man's Extraordinary Quest for Olympic Glory, Twenty Years After His First Gold Medal. London: Macmillan.See here the video on onlympics.com. The spark at 5:53: https://olympics.com/en/video/rowing-sydney-2000-coxless-pair-men.</ref>

If a win in a rowing pair can happen so decisively with only three words, between two people led by a potential win, trapped in a shell, but being connected in a way that they both testified they "could only dream of", there may be something we can learn about it, in sports but also in business. Small factors, as little as three words, can make a huge difference. Context apparently greatly matters. Sincere, great relationships too.

Having watched the U23 2016 race in person, still stunned by its results compared to all other races I have watched— which is a lot, with two of my daughters and my wife rowing—coupled with my passion for business performance, and the chance to be in contact with extraordinary people at an extraordinary time, ultimately led to this study.

=Running the Study=
Rather than introducing new anecdotes about rowing, the project began with methodologies borrowed from the social sciences that blend qualitative and quantitative approaches.<ref>Research framework primarily uses Miles and Huberman's qualitative (and quantitative) methodologies, coupled with other works, notably those of Wacheux and GRI's own framework focused on assessment techniques:   - Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.   - Wacheux, F. (1996). Méthodes Qualitatives de Recherche en Gestion. Economica.   - GRI general framework. [[General_Framework|See details on the framework, methods and references here on this wiki.]]</ref> The challenge added to the study: to learn from this success about how performance also occurs in competitive businesses, proved, over time, to be substantial.

Although there are commonalities between sports and competitive businesses (not to mention sports businesses and, leaving aside public administrations), the sports context reveals a simple truth about the focus on being first in a short period. Rowing is a perfect sport for showing how success is built collectively, with athletes in close proximity. Rather than presenting a list of explanations, the comparison has enabled the study to focus on core concepts that drive performance in both contexts.

I was fortunate to obtain the team's GRI adaptive profiles and provide feedback to the athletes and coach a few days before the race. Individual interviews were conducted at the end of 2023. Analysis of the interviews and results has led to considering all factors, including those related to leadership, positive psychology, and organizational performance, that can explain the crew's exceptional winning margin.

The athletes, coach, and participants in the study are as follows: Erin Briggs (Bow 1), Cassandra Johnson (Seat 2), Kendall Brewer (Seat 3), Gia Doonan (Seat 4), Regina Salmons (Seat 5), Sarah Dougherty (Seat 6), Georgia Ratcliff (Seat 7), Kendall Chase (Seat 8), Colette Lucas-Conwell (Coxswain), and Wesley Ng (coach). We are grateful for their generous participation in this study, which has spanned several years, and for the key involvement of their coxswain.

The above "I" in the text conducting the study is Frederic Lucas-Conwell. Frederic is also the founder and President of the Growth Resources Institute and the author of the tools and techniques behind the adaptive profiles used in the study. The "we" in the text sometimes refers to all involved in the work we do at GRI, and at other times to all of us as human beings.

=Margin's Plot=

This plot illustrates the winning margin between the first- and second-place 8+ boats since 1977, for men and women, U23 and senior, at the World Championship level. The arrow shows where the results of the 2016 USA Women U23 8+ boat stand. See all the details of the data below, which were extracted from the World Rowing website. See also the details of the results of the 2016 US Women’s U23 8+ boat.

The margins were ordered from smallest to largest in each of the four categories. Although the results are comparable, analysis by category may reveal striking differences between men and women, and between U23 and senior levels.

[[File:Difference plot 2016 w8+ U23.png|center|650px]]

==Results Analysis==
To determine whether the 2016 U23 USA Women 8+ result was exceptional, we needed to compare it to other results at a similar world championship level<ref>For results of the 2016 U23 USA Women 8+ boat here: https://worldrowing.com/event/2016-world-rowing-under-23-championships/
</ref>. We examined the winning margin of all 8+ events at the World Championships and Olympics for U23 Women, U23 Men, Senior Women, and Senior Men. It is worth noting that the U23 championship for men and women only began in 2005 and 2006, respectively<ref>For the results of all races on the World Rowing website https://worldrowing.com).</ref>.

Anti-doping has been a concern in rowing since the 1960s. The International Rowing Federation (FISA) was the first to introduce an anti-doping regulation in 1976, well before the establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in 1999 and the adoption of the anti-doping code at the Sydney Games in 2000. As a result, only the results from 1977 onwards are taken into account for consideration.

Both Senior and U23 results are comparable, which is why we included both. However, Junior results that are too distant from the senior level were not included.

Of the 20 data points collected on the U23 Women’s category, the 2016 US 8+ was the only crew to have a winning margin over 7 seconds, an incredible 3.56 seconds above the average winning margin. Furthermore, across all 131 data points collected, we found the average winning margin to be 2.05 sec, 5.11 sec less than the 7.16 sec winning margin of the 2016 USA Women’s 8+.

We didn't find evidence that the 2016 results were due to any external factors beyond the team's efforts, such as weather conditions at a specific location on the water. All athletes complied with doping regulations. Other boats from Great Britain, Russia, New Zealand, Australia, and Germany were equally engaged in the race.

==Results Data==

The tables below show the results for men and women in the U23 (Under 23 years old) and senior categories at the World Championship level, including the Olympics. Since we were interested in testing how much the first boat won, only the first two results are included in the tables. Weather conditions can vary significantly from race to race; thus, the time of the winning boat doesn't provide an accurate assessment of how well it did when comparing results with other years. However, the margin between the first and second boats does. This does happen in other sports like sailing, but not in others such as swimming.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Women's U23
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || United States || 6:05.70 || Great Britain || 6:12.06 || 6.36
|-
| 2025 || Great Britain || 6:13.60 || United States || 6:16.28 || 2.68
|-
| 2024 || Great Britain || 6:06.58 || United States || 6:08.35 || 1.77
|-
| 2023 || United States || 6:09.14 || Germany || 6:13.34 || 4.2
|-
| 2022 || United States || 6:23.03 || Great Britain || 6:27.81 || 4.78
|-
| 2021 || United States || 6:16.69 || Netherlands || 6:20.43 || 3.74
|-
| 2019 || Netherlands || 6:17.93 || Great Britain || 6:22.52 || 4.59
|-
| 2018 || Canada || 6:04.61 || Netherlands || 6:06.58 || 1.97
|-
| 2017 || Canada || 6:09.89 || United States || 6:16.44 || 6.55
|-
| 2016 || United States || 6:36.90 || Great Britain || 6:44.06 || 7.16*
|-
| 2015 || United States || 6:19.49 || Russia || 6:22.02 || 2.53
|-
| 2014 || United States || 6:07.88 || Great Britain || 6:11.76 || 3.88
|-
| 2013 || United States || 6:16.81 || Great Britain || 6:19.15 || 2.34
|-
| 2012 || United States || 6:25.92 || Germany || 6:30.47 || 4.55
|-
| 2011 || Canada || 6:03.23 || New Zealand || 6:06.02 || 2.79
|-
| 2010 || United States || 6:31.97 || New Zealand || 6:36.48 || 4.51
|-
| 2009 || Great Britain || 6:20.71 || United States || 6:21.80 || 1.09
|-
| 2008 || United States || 6:36.01 || Poland || 6:39.72 || 3.71
|-
| 2007 || Belarus || 6:15.20 || Germany || 6:15.43 || 0.23
|-
| 2006 || United States || 6:06.68 || Belarus || 6:08.98 || 2.3
|-
| || || || || Average || 3.6
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.8
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Men's U23
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || Great Britain || 5:31.94 || United States || 5:32.98 || 1.04
|-
| 2025 || Great Britain || 5:29.60 || New Zealand || 5:32.59 || 2.99
|-
| 2024 || Great Britain || 5:24.73 || United States || 5:27.50 || 2.77
|-
| 2023 || Great Britain || 5:26.51 || United States || 5:28.90 || 2.39
|-
| 2022 || Great Britain || 5:51.71 || United States || 5:53.97 || 2.26
|-
| 2021 || Great Britain || 5:34.32 || United States || 5:34.55 || 0.21
|-
| 2019 || Great Britain || 5:34.30 || United States || 5:36.21 || 1.91
|-
| 2018 || United States || 5:22.48 || Great Britain || 5:24.93 || 2.45
|-
| 2017 || Netherlands || 5:29.55 || Romania || 5:31.57 || 2.02
|-
| 2016 || Netherlands || 5:54.10 || Great Britain || 5:57.26 || 3.16
|-
| 2015 || Germany || 5:33.56 || United States || 5:36.49 || 2.93
|-
| 2014 || New Zealand || 5:28.82 || Australia || 5:30.45 || 1.63
|-
| 2013 || New Zealand || 5:28.63 || United States || 5:31.79 || 3.16
|-
| 2012 || United States || 5:47.66 || Germany || 5:48.22 || 0.56
|-
| 2011 || United States || 5:24.31 || Czech Republic || 5:26.21 || 1.9
|-
| 2010 || Germany || 5:44.78 || United States || 5:47.48 || 2.7
|-
| 2009 || Poland || 5:32.77 || Germany || 5:34.11 || 1.34
|-
| 2008 || United States || 5:49.42 || Canada || 5:53.30 || 3.88
|-
| 2007 || Estonia || 5:33.90 || Germany || 5:34.29 || 0.39
|-
| 2006 || Canada || 5:30.72 || Germany || 5:31.78 || 1.06
|-
| 2005 || Romania || 5:50.90 || Italy || 5:51.82 || 0.92
|-
| || || || || Average || 1.9
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.0
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Women's Senior
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || Romania || 5:51.88 || Great Britain || 5:52:76 || 0.88
|-
| 2025 || Netherlands || 6:08.10 || Canada || 6:10.83 || 2.73
|-
| 2024 || Romania || 5:54.39 || Canada || 5:58.84 || 4.45
|-
| 2023 || Romania || 6:01.28 || United States || 6:03.73 || 2.45
|-
| 2022 || Romania || 6:01.14 || Netherlands || 6:05.04 || 3.9
|-
| 2021 || Canada || 5:59.13 || New Zealand || 6:00.04 || 0.91
|-
| 2019 || New Zealand || 5:56.91 || Australia || 5:59.63 || 2.72
|-
| 2018 || United States || 6:00.97 || Canada || 6:03.05 || 2.08
|-
| 2017 || Romania || 6:06.40 || Canada || 6:07.09 || 0.69
|-
| 2016 || United States || 6:01.49 || Great Britain || 6:03.49 || 2
|-
| 2015 || United States || 6:05.65 || New Zealand || 6:08.52 || 2.87
|-
| 2014 || United States || 5:56.83 || Canada || 5:59.66 || 2.83
|-
| 2013 || United States || 6:02.14 || Canada || 6:07.04 || 4.9
|-
| 2012 || United States || 6:10.59 || Canada || 6:12.06 || 1.47
|-
| 2011 || United States || 6:03.65 || Canada || 6:04.39 || 0.74
|-
| 2010 || United States || 6:12.42 || Canada || 6:16.12 || 3.7
|-
| 2009 || United States || 6:05.34 || Romania || 6:06.94 || 1.6
|-
| 2008 || United States || 6:05.34 || Netherlands || 6:07.22 || 1.88
|-
| 2007 || United States || 6:17.21 || Romania || 6:18.34 || 1.13
|-
| 2006 || United States || 5:55.50 || Germany || 5:57.29 || 1.79
|-
| 2005 || Australia || 5:58.10 || Romania || 5:59.50 || 1.4
|-
| 2004 || Romania || 6:17.70 || United States || 6:19.56 || 1.86
|-
| 2003 || Germany || 6:41.23 || Romania || 6:44.63 || 3.4
|-
| 2002 || United States || 6:04.25 || Australia || 6:05.10 || 0.85
|-
| 2001 || Australia || 6:03.66 || Romania || 6:04.96 || 1.3
|-
| 2000 || Romania || 6:06.44 || Netherlands || 6:09.39 || 2.95
|-
| 1999 || Romania || 6:47.66 || United States || 6:48.81 || 1.15
|-
| 1998 || Romania || 6:14.62 || United States || 6:15.81 || 1.19
|-
| 1997 || Romania || 6:02.40 || Canada || 6:07.18 || 4.78
|-
| 1996 || Romania || 6:19.73 || Canada || 6:24.05 || 4.32
|-
| 1995 || United States || 6:50.73 || Romania || 6:52.76 || 2.03
|-
| 1994 || Germany || 6:07.42 || United States || 6:08.24 || 0.82
|-
| 1993 || Romania || 6:18.88 || United States || 6:20.42 || 1.54
|-
| 1992 || Canada || 6:02.62 || Romania || 6:06.26 || 3.64
|-
| 1991 || Canada || 6:28.20 || URS || 6:28.73 || 0.53
|-
| 1990 || Romania || 5:59.26 || United States || 6:01.67 || 2.41
|-
| 1989 || Romania || 6:07.92 || Germany || 6:08.19 || 0.27
|-
| 1988 || RDA || 6:15.17 || Romania || 6:17.44 || 2.27
|-
| 1987 || Romania || 6:55.61 || United States || 6:57.27 || 1.66
|-
| 1986 || URS || 6:08.76 || RDA || 6:09.77 || 1.01
|-
| 1985 || URS || 6:14.00 || RDA || 6:14.89 || 0.89
|-
| || || || || Average || 2.1
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.2
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Men's Senior
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || Netherlands || 5:17.75 || Great Britain || 5:17.81 || 0.06
|-
| 2025 || Netherlands || 5:27.67 || Great Britain || 5:29.93 || 2.26
|-
| 2024 || Great Britain || 5:22.88 || Netherlands || 5:23.92 || 1.05
|-
| 2023 || Great Britain || 5:24.20 || Netherlands || 5:25.23 || 1.03
|-
| 2022 || Great Britain || 5:24.41 || Netherlands || 5:25.52 || 1.11
|-
| 2021 || New Zealand || 5:24.64 || Germany || 5:25.60 || 0.96
|-
| 2019 || Germany || 5:19.41 || Netherlands || 5:19.96 || 0.55
|-
| 2018 || Germany || 5:24.31 || Australia || 5:26.11 || 1.8
|-
| 2017 || Germany || 5:26.85 || United States || 5:28.45 || 1.6
|-
| 2016 || Great Britain || 5:29.63 || Germany || 5:30.96 || 1.33
|-
| 2015 || Great Britain || 5:35.18 || Germany || 5:36.36 || 0.18
|-
| 2014 || Great Britain || 5:24.11 || Germany || 5:24.77 || 0.66
|-
| 2013 || Great Britain || 5:30.35 || Germany || 5:30.89 || 0.54
|-
| 2012 || Germany || 5:48.75 || Canada || 5:49.98 || 1.23
|-
| 2011 || Germany || 5:28.81 || Great Britain || 5:30.83 || 2.02
|-
| 2010 || Germany || 5:33.84 || Great Britain || 5:34.46 || 0.62
|-
| 2009 || Germany || 5:24.13 || Canada || 5:27.15 || 3.02
|-
| 2008 || Canada || 5:23.89 || Great Britain || 5:25.11 || 1.22
|-
| 2007 || Canada || 5:34.92 || Germany || 5:37.19 || 2.27
|-
| 2006 || Germany || 5:21.85 || Italy || 5:23.29 || 1.44
|-
| 2005 || United States || 5:22.75 || Italy || 5:24.01 || 1.26
|-
| 2004 || United States || 5:42.48 || Netherlands || 5:43.75 || 1.27
|-
| 2003 || Canada || 6:00.44 || United States || 6:01.46 || 1.02
|-
| 2002 || Canada || 5:26.92 || Germany || 5:28.16 || 1.24
|-
| 2001 || Romania || 5:27.48 || Croatia || 5:28.47 || 0.99
|-
| 2000 || Great Britain || 5:33.08 || Australia || 5:33.88 || 0.8
|-
| 1999 || United States || 6:01.58 || Great Britain || 6:03.27 || 1.69
|-
| 1998 || United States || 5:38.78 || Germany || 5:39.48 || 0.7
|-
| 1997 || United States || 5:27.20 || Romania || 5:27.76 || 0.56
|-
| 1996 || Netherlands || 5:42.74 || Germany || 5:44.58 || 1.84
|-
| 1995 || Germany || 5:53.40 || Netherlands || 5:55.54 || 2.14
|-
| 1994 || United States || 5:24.50 || Netherlands || 5:25.10 || 0.6
|-
| 1993 || Germany || 5:37.08 || Romania || 5:39.33 || 2.25
|-
| 1992 || Canada || 5:29.53 || Romania || 5:29.67 || 0.14
|-
| 1991 || Germany || 5:50.98 || Canada || 5:51.68 || 0.7
|-
| 1990 || RFA || 5:26.62 || Canada || 5:27.57 || 0.95
|-
| 1989 || RFA || 5:43.88 || RDA || 5:45.70 || 1.82
|-
| 1988 || RFA || 5:46.05 || URS || 5:48.01 || 1.96
|-
| 1987 || United States || 5:58.83 || Germany || 6:01.94 || 3.11
|-
| 1986 || Australia || 5:33.54 || URS || 5:37.61 || 4.07
|-
| 1985 || URS || 5:33.71 || Italy || 5:34.58 || 0.87
|-
| 1984 || Canada || 5:41.32 || United States || 5:41.74 || 0.42
|-
| 1983 || New Zealand || 5:43.39 || RDA || 5:35.94 || 1.55
|-
| 1982 || New Zealand || 5:36.99 || RDA || 5:39.17 || 2.18
|-
| 1981 || URS || 6:02.30 || Great Britain || 6:04.31 || 2.01
|-
| 1980 || RDA || 5:49.05 || Great Britain || 5:51.92 || 2.87
|-
| 1979 || RDA || 5:36.41 || New Zealand || 5:39.92 || 3.51
|-
| 1978 || RDA || 5:54.25 || RFA || 5:55.17 || 0.92
|-
| 1977 || RDA || 5:45.36 || URS || 5:50.71 || 5.35
|-
| || || || || Average || 1.9
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.0
|}

=Notes=

Row Results

2026-08-31T20:13:17Z

Flc: /* Results Data */

=Introduction=
[[File:U23 W8+ 3-2.jpg|right|thumb|500px]]
This page provides information about a study we conducted at GRI to analyze the results of the USA U23 Women 8+ team at the 2016 World Rowing Championships in Rotterdam, Netherlands. The overall purpose of the study is to 1) confirm that the 2016 USA Women U23 8+ team's results stand out and 2) provide insights from which we can learn in rowing, other sports, and business.

=An Unprecedented Victory=

According to our analysis, the 2016 USA Women U23 8+ team achieved the largest winning margin in all 8+ events at the Senior and U23 levels since 1977, including men, women, and the Olympic level. This is a monumental achievement in rowing, setting a new world record.

Conditions in rowing can vary significantly from race to race, but the margin between the first and second boats provides an accurate assessment of how well the winning boat performed. A winning margin of 7.16 seconds for the 2016 USA Women U23 8+, when on average, U23 and Senior confounded is 2.05 seconds, in a sport where a millisecond can make a difference, is simply astounding. As we have continued to track results since we started this study, this achievement has not been surpassed yet. The number of factors at play that impact results is numerous, starting well before the race, and including human factors that, by nature, are hard to capture.

=Origin of the Study=

The study started in 2023, with the conjunction of watching rowing races in Chile at the Pan-American Games, where one of my daughters, Colette, coaxed the US mixed boat to a substantial margin, and seeing Jean-Christophe Rolland, the President of the International Rowing Federation, awarding medals. Rolland is best known for the Sydney 2000 Olympics victory in the pair with Michel Andrieux, when he made a crucial call of just three words "pour nos enfants" (for our children) that instantly sparked their decisive win<Ref>See here the book: Searle, G. (2012). If Not Now, When?: One Man's Extraordinary Quest for Olympic Glory, Twenty Years After His First Gold Medal. London: Macmillan.See here the video on onlympics.com. The spark at 5:53: https://olympics.com/en/video/rowing-sydney-2000-coxless-pair-men.</ref>

If a win in a rowing pair can happen so decisively with only three words, between two people led by a potential win, trapped in a shell, but being connected in a way that they both testified they "could only dream of", there may be something we can learn about it, in sports but also in business. Small factors, as little as three words, can make a huge difference. Context apparently greatly matters. Sincere, great relationships too.

Having watched the U23 2016 race in person, still stunned by its results compared to all other races I have watched— which is a lot, with two of my daughters and my wife rowing—coupled with my passion for business performance, and the chance to be in contact with extraordinary people at an extraordinary time, ultimately led to this study.

=Running the Study=
Rather than introducing new anecdotes about rowing, the project began with methodologies borrowed from the social sciences that blend qualitative and quantitative approaches.<ref>Research framework primarily uses Miles and Huberman's qualitative (and quantitative) methodologies, coupled with other works, notably those of Wacheux and GRI's own framework focused on assessment techniques:   - Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.   - Wacheux, F. (1996). Méthodes Qualitatives de Recherche en Gestion. Economica.   - GRI general framework. [[General_Framework|See details on the framework, methods and references here on this wiki.]]</ref> The challenge added to the study: to learn from this success about how performance also occurs in competitive businesses, proved, over time, to be substantial.

Although there are commonalities between sports and competitive businesses (not to mention sports businesses and, leaving aside public administrations), the sports context reveals a simple truth about the focus on being first in a short period. Rowing is a perfect sport for showing how success is built collectively, with athletes in close proximity. Rather than presenting a list of explanations, the comparison has enabled the study to focus on core concepts that drive performance in both contexts.

I was fortunate to obtain the team's GRI adaptive profiles and provide feedback to the athletes and coach a few days before the race. Individual interviews were conducted at the end of 2023. Analysis of the interviews and results has led to considering all factors, including those related to leadership, positive psychology, and organizational performance, that can explain the crew's exceptional winning margin.

The athletes, coach, and participants in the study are as follows: Erin Briggs (Bow 1), Cassandra Johnson (Seat 2), Kendall Brewer (Seat 3), Gia Doonan (Seat 4), Regina Salmons (Seat 5), Sarah Dougherty (Seat 6), Georgia Ratcliff (Seat 7), Kendall Chase (Seat 8), Colette Lucas-Conwell (Coxswain), and Wesley Ng (coach). We are grateful for their generous participation in this study, which has spanned several years, and for the key involvement of their coxswain.

The above "I" in the text conducting the study is Frederic Lucas-Conwell. Frederic is also the founder and President of the Growth Resources Institute and the author of the tools and techniques behind the adaptive profiles used in the study. The "we" in the text sometimes refers to all involved in the work we do at GRI, and at other times to all of us as human beings.

=Margin's Plot=

This plot illustrates the winning margin between the first- and second-place 8+ boats since 1977, for men and women, U23 and senior, at the World Championship level. The arrow shows where the results of the 2016 USA Women U23 8+ boat stand. See all the details of the data below, which were extracted from the World Rowing website. See also the details of the results of the 2016 US Women’s U23 8+ boat.

The margins were ordered from smallest to largest in each of the four categories. Although the results are comparable, analysis by category may reveal striking differences between men and women, and between U23 and senior levels.

[[File:Difference plot 2016 w8+ U23.png|center|650px]]

==Results Analysis==
To determine whether the 2016 U23 USA Women 8+ result was exceptional, we needed to compare it to other results at a similar world championship level<ref>For results of the 2016 U23 USA Women 8+ boat here: https://worldrowing.com/event/2016-world-rowing-under-23-championships/
</ref>. We examined the winning margin of all 8+ events at the World Championships and Olympics for U23 Women, U23 Men, Senior Women, and Senior Men. It is worth noting that the U23 championship for men and women only began in 2005 and 2006, respectively<ref>For the results of all races on the World Rowing website https://worldrowing.com).</ref>.

Anti-doping has been a concern in rowing since the 1960s. The International Rowing Federation (FISA) was the first to introduce an anti-doping regulation in 1976, well before the establishment of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in 1999 and the adoption of the anti-doping code at the Sydney Games in 2000. As a result, only the results from 1977 onwards are taken into account for consideration.

Both Senior and U23 results are comparable, which is why we included both. However, Junior results that are too distant from the senior level were not included.

Of the 20 data points collected on the U23 Women’s category, the 2016 US 8+ was the only crew to have a winning margin over 7 seconds, an incredible 3.56 seconds above the average winning margin. Furthermore, across all 131 data points collected, we found the average winning margin to be 2.05 sec, 5.11 sec less than the 7.16 sec winning margin of the 2016 USA Women’s 8+.

We didn't find evidence that the 2016 results were due to any external factors beyond the team's efforts, such as weather conditions at a specific location on the water. All athletes complied with doping regulations. Other boats from Great Britain, Russia, New Zealand, Australia, and Germany were equally engaged in the race.

==Results Data==

The tables below show the results for men and women in the U23 (Under 23 years old) and senior categories at the World Championship level, including the Olympics. Since we were interested in testing how much the first boat won, only the first two results are included in the tables. Weather conditions can vary significantly from race to race; thus, the time of the winning boat doesn't provide an accurate assessment of how well it did when comparing results with other years. However, the margin between the first and second boats does. This does happen in other sports like sailing, but not in others such as swimming.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Women's U23
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || United States || 6:05.70 || Great Britain || 6:12.06 || 6.36
|-
| 2025 || Great Britain || 6:13.60 || United States || 6:16.28 || 2.68
|-
| 2024 || Great Britain || 6:06.58 || United States || 6:08.35 || 1.77
|-
| 2023 || United States || 6:09.14 || Germany || 6:13.34 || 4.2
|-
| 2022 || United States || 6:23.03 || Great Britain || 6:27.81 || 4.78
|-
| 2021 || United States || 6:16.69 || Netherlands || 6:20.43 || 3.74
|-
| 2019 || Netherlands || 6:17.93 || Great Britain || 6:22.52 || 4.59
|-
| 2018 || Canada || 6:04.61 || Netherlands || 6:06.58 || 1.97
|-
| 2017 || Canada || 6:09.89 || United States || 6:16.44 || 6.55
|-
| 2016 || United States || 6:36.90 || Great Britain || 6:44.06 || 7.16*
|-
| 2015 || United States || 6:19.49 || Russia || 6:22.02 || 2.53
|-
| 2014 || United States || 6:07.88 || Great Britain || 6:11.76 || 3.88
|-
| 2013 || United States || 6:16.81 || Great Britain || 6:19.15 || 2.34
|-
| 2012 || United States || 6:25.92 || Germany || 6:30.47 || 4.55
|-
| 2011 || Canada || 6:03.23 || New Zealand || 6:06.02 || 2.79
|-
| 2010 || United States || 6:31.97 || New Zealand || 6:36.48 || 4.51
|-
| 2009 || Great Britain || 6:20.71 || United States || 6:21.80 || 1.09
|-
| 2008 || United States || 6:36.01 || Poland || 6:39.72 || 3.71
|-
| 2007 || Belarus || 6:15.20 || Germany || 6:15.43 || 0.23
|-
| 2006 || United States || 6:06.68 || Belarus || 6:08.98 || 2.3
|-
| || || || || Average || 3.6
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.8
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Men's U23
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || Great Britain || 5:31.94 || United States || 5:32.98 || 1.04
|-
| 2025 || Great Britain || 5:29.60 || New Zealand || 5:32.59 || 2.99
|-
| 2024 || Great Britain || 5:24.73 || United States || 5:27.50 || 2.77
|-
| 2023 || Great Britain || 5:26.51 || United States || 5:28.90 || 2.39
|-
| 2022 || Great Britain || 5:51.71 || United States || 5:53.97 || 2.26
|-
| 2021 || Great Britain || 5:34.32 || United States || 5:34.55 || 0.21
|-
| 2019 || Great Britain || 5:34.30 || United States || 5:36.21 || 1.91
|-
| 2018 || United States || 5:22.48 || Great Britain || 5:24.93 || 2.45
|-
| 2017 || Netherlands || 5:29.55 || Romania || 5:31.57 || 2.02
|-
| 2016 || Netherlands || 5:54.10 || Great Britain || 5:57.26 || 3.16
|-
| 2015 || Germany || 5:33.56 || United States || 5:36.49 || 2.93
|-
| 2014 || New Zealand || 5:28.82 || Australia || 5:30.45 || 1.63
|-
| 2013 || New Zealand || 5:28.63 || United States || 5:31.79 || 3.16
|-
| 2012 || United States || 5:47.66 || Germany || 5:48.22 || 0.56
|-
| 2011 || United States || 5:24.31 || Czech Republic || 5:26.21 || 1.9
|-
| 2010 || Germany || 5:44.78 || United States || 5:47.48 || 2.7
|-
| 2009 || Poland || 5:32.77 || Germany || 5:34.11 || 1.34
|-
| 2008 || United States || 5:49.42 || Canada || 5:53.30 || 3.88
|-
| 2007 || Estonia || 5:33.90 || Germany || 5:34.29 || 0.39
|-
| 2006 || Canada || 5:30.72 || Germany || 5:31.78 || 1.06
|-
| 2005 || Romania || 5:50.90 || Italy || 5:51.82 || 0.92
|-
| || || || || Average || 1.9
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.0
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Women's Senior
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || Roania || 5:51.88 || Great Britain || 5:52:76 || 0.88
|-
| 2025 || Netherlands || 6:08.10 || Canada || 6:10.83 || 2.73
|-
| 2024 || Romania || 5:54.39 || Canada || 5:58.84 || 4.45
|-
| 2023 || Romania || 6:01.28 || United States || 6:03.73 || 2.45
|-
| 2022 || Romania || 6:01.14 || Netherlands || 6:05.04 || 3.9
|-
| 2021 || Canada || 5:59.13 || New Zealand || 6:00.04 || 0.91
|-
| 2019 || New Zealand || 5:56.91 || Australia || 5:59.63 || 2.72
|-
| 2018 || United States || 6:00.97 || Canada || 6:03.05 || 2.08
|-
| 2017 || Romania || 6:06.40 || Canada || 6:07.09 || 0.69
|-
| 2016 || United States || 6:01.49 || Great Britain || 6:03.49 || 2
|-
| 2015 || United States || 6:05.65 || New Zealand || 6:08.52 || 2.87
|-
| 2014 || United States || 5:56.83 || Canada || 5:59.66 || 2.83
|-
| 2013 || United States || 6:02.14 || Canada || 6:07.04 || 4.9
|-
| 2012 || United States || 6:10.59 || Canada || 6:12.06 || 1.47
|-
| 2011 || United States || 6:03.65 || Canada || 6:04.39 || 0.74
|-
| 2010 || United States || 6:12.42 || Canada || 6:16.12 || 3.7
|-
| 2009 || United States || 6:05.34 || Romania || 6:06.94 || 1.6
|-
| 2008 || United States || 6:05.34 || Netherlands || 6:07.22 || 1.88
|-
| 2007 || United States || 6:17.21 || Romania || 6:18.34 || 1.13
|-
| 2006 || United States || 5:55.50 || Germany || 5:57.29 || 1.79
|-
| 2005 || Australia || 5:58.10 || Romania || 5:59.50 || 1.4
|-
| 2004 || Romania || 6:17.70 || United States || 6:19.56 || 1.86
|-
| 2003 || Germany || 6:41.23 || Romania || 6:44.63 || 3.4
|-
| 2002 || United States || 6:04.25 || Australia || 6:05.10 || 0.85
|-
| 2001 || Australia || 6:03.66 || Romania || 6:04.96 || 1.3
|-
| 2000 || Romania || 6:06.44 || Netherlands || 6:09.39 || 2.95
|-
| 1999 || Romania || 6:47.66 || United States || 6:48.81 || 1.15
|-
| 1998 || Romania || 6:14.62 || United States || 6:15.81 || 1.19
|-
| 1997 || Romania || 6:02.40 || Canada || 6:07.18 || 4.78
|-
| 1996 || Romania || 6:19.73 || Canada || 6:24.05 || 4.32
|-
| 1995 || United States || 6:50.73 || Romania || 6:52.76 || 2.03
|-
| 1994 || Germany || 6:07.42 || United States || 6:08.24 || 0.82
|-
| 1993 || Romania || 6:18.88 || United States || 6:20.42 || 1.54
|-
| 1992 || Canada || 6:02.62 || Romania || 6:06.26 || 3.64
|-
| 1991 || Canada || 6:28.20 || URS || 6:28.73 || 0.53
|-
| 1990 || Romania || 5:59.26 || United States || 6:01.67 || 2.41
|-
| 1989 || Romania || 6:07.92 || Germany || 6:08.19 || 0.27
|-
| 1988 || RDA || 6:15.17 || Romania || 6:17.44 || 2.27
|-
| 1987 || Romania || 6:55.61 || United States || 6:57.27 || 1.66
|-
| 1986 || URS || 6:08.76 || RDA || 6:09.77 || 1.01
|-
| 1985 || URS || 6:14.00 || RDA || 6:14.89 || 0.89
|-
| || || || || Average || 2.1
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.2
|}

{| class="wikitable" style="margin:auto"
|+ Men's Senior
|-
! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
|-
| 2026 || Netherlands || 5:17.75 || Great Britain || 5:17.81 || 0.06
|-
| 2025 || Netherlands || 5:27.67 || Great Britain || 5:29.93 || 2.26
|-
| 2024 || Great Britain || 5:22.88 || Netherlands || 5:23.92 || 1.05
|-
| 2023 || Great Britain || 5:24.20 || Netherlands || 5:25.23 || 1.03
|-
| 2022 || Great Britain || 5:24.41 || Netherlands || 5:25.52 || 1.11
|-
| 2021 || New Zealand || 5:24.64 || Germany || 5:25.60 || 0.96
|-
| 2019 || Germany || 5:19.41 || Netherlands || 5:19.96 || 0.55
|-
| 2018 || Germany || 5:24.31 || Australia || 5:26.11 || 1.8
|-
| 2017 || Germany || 5:26.85 || United States || 5:28.45 || 1.6
|-
| 2016 || Great Britain || 5:29.63 || Germany || 5:30.96 || 1.33
|-
| 2015 || Great Britain || 5:35.18 || Germany || 5:36.36 || 0.18
|-
| 2014 || Great Britain || 5:24.11 || Germany || 5:24.77 || 0.66
|-
| 2013 || Great Britain || 5:30.35 || Germany || 5:30.89 || 0.54
|-
| 2012 || Germany || 5:48.75 || Canada || 5:49.98 || 1.23
|-
| 2011 || Germany || 5:28.81 || Great Britain || 5:30.83 || 2.02
|-
| 2010 || Germany || 5:33.84 || Great Britain || 5:34.46 || 0.62
|-
| 2009 || Germany || 5:24.13 || Canada || 5:27.15 || 3.02
|-
| 2008 || Canada || 5:23.89 || Great Britain || 5:25.11 || 1.22
|-
| 2007 || Canada || 5:34.92 || Germany || 5:37.19 || 2.27
|-
| 2006 || Germany || 5:21.85 || Italy || 5:23.29 || 1.44
|-
| 2005 || United States || 5:22.75 || Italy || 5:24.01 || 1.26
|-
| 2004 || United States || 5:42.48 || Netherlands || 5:43.75 || 1.27
|-
| 2003 || Canada || 6:00.44 || United States || 6:01.46 || 1.02
|-
| 2002 || Canada || 5:26.92 || Germany || 5:28.16 || 1.24
|-
| 2001 || Romania || 5:27.48 || Croatia || 5:28.47 || 0.99
|-
| 2000 || Great Britain || 5:33.08 || Australia || 5:33.88 || 0.8
|-
| 1999 || United States || 6:01.58 || Great Britain || 6:03.27 || 1.69
|-
| 1998 || United States || 5:38.78 || Germany || 5:39.48 || 0.7
|-
| 1997 || United States || 5:27.20 || Romania || 5:27.76 || 0.56
|-
| 1996 || Netherlands || 5:42.74 || Germany || 5:44.58 || 1.84
|-
| 1995 || Germany || 5:53.40 || Netherlands || 5:55.54 || 2.14
|-
| 1994 || United States || 5:24.50 || Netherlands || 5:25.10 || 0.6
|-
| 1993 || Germany || 5:37.08 || Romania || 5:39.33 || 2.25
|-
| 1992 || Canada || 5:29.53 || Romania || 5:29.67 || 0.14
|-
| 1991 || Germany || 5:50.98 || Canada || 5:51.68 || 0.7
|-
| 1990 || RFA || 5:26.62 || Canada || 5:27.57 || 0.95
|-
| 1989 || RFA || 5:43.88 || RDA || 5:45.70 || 1.82
|-
| 1988 || RFA || 5:46.05 || URS || 5:48.01 || 1.96
|-
| 1987 || United States || 5:58.83 || Germany || 6:01.94 || 3.11
|-
| 1986 || Australia || 5:33.54 || URS || 5:37.61 || 4.07
|-
| 1985 || URS || 5:33.71 || Italy || 5:34.58 || 0.87
|-
| 1984 || Canada || 5:41.32 || United States || 5:41.74 || 0.42
|-
| 1983 || New Zealand || 5:43.39 || RDA || 5:35.94 || 1.55
|-
| 1982 || New Zealand || 5:36.99 || RDA || 5:39.17 || 2.18
|-
| 1981 || URS || 6:02.30 || Great Britain || 6:04.31 || 2.01
|-
| 1980 || RDA || 5:49.05 || Great Britain || 5:51.92 || 2.87
|-
| 1979 || RDA || 5:36.41 || New Zealand || 5:39.92 || 3.51
|-
| 1978 || RDA || 5:54.25 || RFA || 5:55.17 || 0.92
|-
| 1977 || RDA || 5:45.36 || URS || 5:50.71 || 5.35
|-
| || || || || Average || 1.9
|-
| || || || || Standard Deviation || 1.0
|}

=Notes=

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:50:14Z

Flc: /* Construction of Performance Indicators */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional production or economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their natural flow are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called effective or strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Effective or Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Production (Economic) Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the well-being and effective performance outlined earlier is classified as production or economic performance. This includes aspects related to production, finance, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Production or economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of production or economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Production or Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal, (2) lagging, (3) pressured, (4) pending, or (5) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, or are high, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that production or economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising or high, 'iopstra' is rising or high, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only production or economic and well-being performance improve or are high, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising or high, 'iopstra' is falling or low, 'iopecon' is reached or high.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that production or economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing or low, 'iopstra' is increasing or high, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the well-being and production performances improve positively or are high, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized as pending. The organization is awaiting production or economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The production or economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up or high, 'iopstra' is up or high, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are declining or low, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down or low, 'iopstra' is down or low.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:48:25Z

Flc: /* Lack of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional production or economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called effective or strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Effective or Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Production (Economic) Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the well-being and effective performance outlined earlier is classified as production or economic performance. This includes aspects related to production, finance, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Production or economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of production or economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Production or Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal, (2) lagging, (3) pressured, (4) pending, or (5) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, or are high, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that production or economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising or high, 'iopstra' is rising or high, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only production or economic and well-being performance improve or are high, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising or high, 'iopstra' is falling or low, 'iopecon' is reached or high.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that production or economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing or low, 'iopstra' is increasing or high, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the well-being and production performances improve positively or are high, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized as pending. The organization is awaiting production or economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The production or economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up or high, 'iopstra' is up or high, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are declining or low, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down or low, 'iopstra' is down or low.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:47:46Z

Flc: /* Types of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional production or economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called effective or strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Effective or Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Production (Economic) Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the well-being and effective performance outlined earlier is classified as production or economic performance. This includes aspects related to production, finance, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Production or economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of production or economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Production or Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal, (2) lagging, (3) pressured, (4) pending, or (5) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, or are high, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that production or economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising or high, 'iopstra' is rising or high, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only production or economic and well-being performance improve or are high, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising or high, 'iopstra' is falling or low, 'iopecon' is reached or high.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that production or economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing or low, 'iopstra' is increasing or high, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the well-being and production performances improve positively or are high, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized as pending. The organization is awaiting production or economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The production or economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up or high, 'iopstra' is up or high, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are declining or low, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down or low, 'iopstra' is down or low.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:39:54Z

Flc: /* Economic Performance Indicators */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional production or economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called effective or strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Effective or Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Production (Economic) Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the well-being and effective performance outlined earlier is classified as production or economic performance. This includes aspects related to production, finance, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Production or economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of production or economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Production or Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are low or decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:37:53Z

Flc: /* Introduction */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional production or economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called effective or strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Effective or Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are low or decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:37:21Z

Flc: /* Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called effective or strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Effective or Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are low or decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:35:34Z

Flc: /* Social Performance Indicators */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Well-being (Social) Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as well-being or social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and individual profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capabilities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of well-being (or social) performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Well-being or Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are low or decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:34:13Z

Flc: /* Strategic Performance Indicators */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Effective (Strategic) Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Social Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and personal profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capacities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of social performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are low or decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

File:GRI Model dep variables.png

2026-08-18T18:32:23Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:GRI Model dep variables.png

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T18:23:14Z

Flc: /* Lack of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Strategic Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Social Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and personal profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capacities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of social performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all Production (economic), well-being (social), and effective (strategic) indicators are low or decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the production or economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the five possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Pending !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ or + || Increase ↗ or + || Decrease ↘ or - || Increase ↗ or + ||Decrease ↘ or -
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T17:37:25Z

Flc: /* Lack of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Strategic Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Social Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and personal profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capacities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of social performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all economic, social, and strategic indicators decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the four possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Lacking
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved (or to be achieved) || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T17:37:07Z

Flc: /* Lack of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Strategic Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Social Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and personal profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capacities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of social performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all economic, social, and strategic indicators decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the four possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal !! Lagging !! Pressured !! Lack of
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved (or to be achieved) || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T17:36:25Z

Flc: /* Lack of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Strategic Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Social Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and personal profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capacities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of social performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all economic, social, and strategic indicators decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the four possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal Performance (and pending) !! Lagging Performance !! Pressured Performance !! Lack of Performance
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved (or to be achieved) || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Organizational Performance Measurement

2026-08-18T17:34:33Z

Flc: /* Lack of performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI_Model_dep_variables.png|right|450px]]
Adaptive profiles, as measured at GRI, indicate how individuals function at their best and how their environment influences their ability to adapt, engage, and perform. Once aggregated, these profiles also illustrate the overall behavior of a team, department, or company. They help identify organizational weaknesses by considering not only the organization’s internal requirements, but also its industry and market needs, and the various adaptive profiles of its stakeholders.

This article explains how the effective (strategic) and well-being (social) indicators are calculated by combining adaptive profiles’ metrics, along with other, more traditional economic indicators, at the organizational level.

=Construction of Performance Indicators=

The unique properties of the adaptive profiles enable a precise understanding of people’s performance in context. Two key properties of their metrics are incorporated into the construction of performance indicators that can then be used at a group level. In summary, they are the following:
* '''Property 1''': Adaptive profiles effectively indicate the level of individuals' involvement, engagement, and effectiveness within their environment. Low adaptation combined with high engagement suggests that people are in roles that align with their values, expectations, interests, and social behavior preferences. Conversely, high adaptation and low engagement indicate disengagement, demotivation, and negative emotions among individuals in their roles. These levels of adaptation and engagement reflect either a mismatch between a person’s social behavior values and their position, or ineffective personal development.
* '''Property 2''': Adaptive profiles, including their factors, scales, indicators, and profiles, offer a detailed view of people’s performance, encompassing social behaviors, values, preferences, styles, interests, and more. This view is based on both how people behave and how they think and feel about those social behaviors. Our best estimate at GRI is that the profiles capture up to 90% of people’s social behaviors across the short, medium, and long term. The intensity of these behaviors is influenced by Property 1 above. As a result, we not only gain a better understanding of how people function but also when their social behaviors are likely to be expressed.

=Strategic Performance Indicators=
In fact, people consistently exhibit measurable social behaviors, preferences, and values. On the other hand, positions also have behavioral requirements that reflect the choices of the organization and its stakeholders. If the organization, its management, shareholders, pressure groups, etc., want efforts to be focused in a particular direction and in a relatively consistent and uniform manner, then this should occur. Conversely, if this is not the case, it suggests that management and recruitment efforts are not meeting their goals: behaviors are out of alignment with the objectives.

By comparing actual behaviors of individuals with desired behaviors at the position level, the organization can assess and manage the relationship between actors' behaviors and the organization’s needs, using the same behavioral dimensions. In practice, the difference can be measured between the behaviors described by the PBI (Position Behavior Indicator) profiles of positions and the actual behaviors of people, as shown in the Effective graph of the GRI adaptive profile. The gap between these indicates which actions should be taken to maximize the effectiveness of social behavior at each position.

This performance is called strategic because understanding how to do things across all positions at every level is crucial when setting goals, planning, and controlling. The ways of selecting personnel, implementing processes, innovating, managing change, taking risks, defending, and gaining market share—highlighted by the adaptive profiles—shape how the organization functions. They involve decisions that are hard to reverse at the highest levels of hierarchy. The measurement of strategic performance is operationalized as the variable 'iopstra' (the Objective Indicator of Strategic Performance).

=Social Performance Indicators=
The measures of adaptation and engagement enable us to evaluate the gap between what might be deemed satisfactory from an organizational perspective, whether agreed upon by stakeholders or not, and what manifests at the individual level in terms of personal effectiveness. The organization may desire certain behaviors, but these behaviors may require efforts that create tension and reduce commitment, as noted in property 1 above.

This performance is referred to as social performance. It reflects consideration of people's expectations and values, a good fit between job and personal profiles, a positive understanding of individual differences by management, employees' self-awareness of their capacities and talents, and the proper adjustment of compensation and reward systems. The measure of social performance is represented by the variable 'iopsoc' (the Objective Indicator of Social Performance).

=Economic Performance Indicators=
Performance beyond the strategic and social performance outlined earlier is classified as economic performance. This includes aspects related to finance, production, marketing, sales, and customer relations. It covers the three dimensions of Kaplan and Norton's balanced scorecard<ref>Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. (1998) The Balanced Scorecard. Organization Editions. Translation of the original 1996 edition: The balanced Scorecard: Translating strategy into action.</ref>: financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation, along with part of the fourth dimension, learning and growth. As long as the indicators are outside the performance measures listed in the strategic and social indicators above, they fall within the scope of economic performance. Absenteeism and staff turnover rates, which can be translated into costs, are also included among economic performance criteria.

Economic performance indicators should be broken down into as many indicators as needed, depending on the context. The measurement of economic performance is represented by the variable 'iopecon' (the Objective Indicator of Economic Performance).

=Types of performance=

The strategic performance ('iopstra') and social performance ('iopsoc') indicators are calculated from individual adaptive profiles and expectations in positions (PBI) and expectations in teams (TBI).

Once the individual profiles are available and the position and team expectations are set, the differences are calculated between the various Natural profiles and the position or team profiles on one hand, and between the Natural and Role profiles on the other hand.

Calculations are made from the profiles: The more similar the profiles are, the smaller the deviations; the more different the profiles are, the greater the deviations. Calculations of deviations for different people within the same teams, departments, or company are integrated into effective (strategic) and well-being (social) performance indicators.

Depending on how the economic, social, and strategic performance indicators change during the analysis period, we can draw the following conclusions about performance. Different combinations of variables tracked over time lead to four possible outcomes: (1) optimal and pending, (2) lagging, (3) under pressure, or (4) lack of performance.

===Optimal Performance===
If the three indicators of social ('iopsoc'), strategic ('iopstra'), and economic ('iopecon') performance all improve positively over the period considered, we can refer to this as 'optimal performance'. This indicates that people are more satisfied and engaged, that roles in the organization are aligned with the strategy in the short and medium/long term, and that economic goals are met.

'iopsoc' is rising and 'iopstra' is rising, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Lagging Performance===
If only economic and social performance improve, one might conclude there is a 'lagging performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, economic goals are met, but job roles are not filled as originally planned.

It is very likely that there is a selection issue. 'iopsoc' is rising, 'iopstra' is falling, 'iopecon' is reached.

===Performance Under Pressure===
If only strategic and economic performance show positive changes, we can conclude that overall performance is under pressure. This indicates that economic performance has improved, aligning people's adaptive profiles more closely with job profiles, but at the same time, people are experiencing more stress, lower motivation, and less engagement. It is likely there are issues with people management.

The indicator 'iopsoc' is decreasing, 'iopstra' is increasing, and 'iopecon' has been reached.

===Pending Performance===
If only the social and strategic performances improve positively, we can classify this as a 'pending performance.' This indicates that people are more engaged and satisfied, with social behavior more aligned with the strategy, but the economic objectives have not yet been achieved.

This scenario is categorized under the first 'optimal performance' as a special case. The organization is awaiting economic outcomes while avoiding adverse effects on stakeholders. The economic objectives might not have been realistic, yet the organization remains committed. 'iopsoc' is up, 'iopstra' is up, 'iopecon' is not achieved.

===Lack of performance===
If all economic, social, and strategic indicators decline, we can conclude that performance is lacking. People are less involved; the adaptive profiles are less aligned with the strategy; the economic results are also lacking. 'iopecon' is not reached, 'iopsoc' is down, 'iopstra' is down.

The following table summarizes the four possible results for performance values:

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
|-
! !! Optimal Performance (and pending) !! Lagging Performance !! Performance Under Pressure !! Lack of Performance
|-
| '''Effective (Strategic) performance''' ''iopstra'' || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Well-being (Social) performance''' ''iopsoc'' || Increase ↗ || Increase ↗ || Decrease ↘ || Decrease ↘
|-
| '''Production (Economic) performance''' ''iopecon'' || Achieved (or to be achieved) || Achieved || Achieved || Not Achieved
|}

=Deployment of the Measures=

The adaptive profiles show how people perform best and how they adjust to their environment. The development of the two indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc', and their combination, reflects the organization's overall performance at the strategic and social levels.

* The indicator 'iopsoc' measures how stakeholders’ satisfaction and involvement evolve over time.
* The indicator 'iopstra' measures how the strategy is reached as set with the TBI indicators for the teams, departments, and the organization.

The profiles enable performance measurement that closely tracks the development of the two indicators 'iopsta' and 'iopsoc' over time, aligning as closely as possible with where the measures are applied: at the individual level with the adaptive profile and at the management level responsible for executing the strategy.

Given the rapid pace of change and organizational complexity, it is essential to reduce non-performance, as indicated by the indicators 'iopstra' and 'iopsoc'. It’s unrealistic to expect that all stakeholders' adaptive profiles will perfectly align with the expectations of their roles, as reflected in the strategic performance indicator ‘iopstra’, or that all social performance indicators will reach their maximum levels, as shown by the social performance indicator ‘iopsoc’.

Excessive adaptation and disengagement, which come with negative emotions, are undesirable. As management research shows, providing feedback to team members and training for managers helps both parties take ownership of the measures.

Decentralizing the management of the adaptive profiles to the operations enables strategy implementation as close as possible to where decisions are made and actions are taken, ensuring that measures and information best serve the organization and its members at various levels. When incorporated into performance reviews, these measures motivate teams and facilitate organizational change. Ultimately, individual and unit-level measures can be integrated into a management control system to ensure that performance targets are met.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

File:GRI Model detailed variables.png

2026-08-17T21:46:43Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:GRI Model detailed variables.png

File:Antecedent Variables.png

2026-08-17T21:43:27Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:Antecedent Variables.png

File:GRI Model detailed variables.png

2026-08-17T19:37:37Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:GRI Model detailed variables.png

File:Use of Assessment Techniques.png

2026-08-17T19:33:53Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:Use of Assessment Techniques.png

File:Use of Assessment Techniques Simplified.png

2026-08-17T19:28:54Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:Use of Assessment Techniques Simplified.png

File:Use of Assessment Techniques.png

2026-08-17T19:24:49Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:Use of Assessment Techniques.png

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T19:10:43Z

Flc: /* Dependent Variables */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language and Signs==
Language and signs encompass the linguistic and symbolic aspects of the assessment technique used in communication. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles, or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use of the technique or concept being assessed in general communication.
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment or concept being assessed.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|250px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T19:10:29Z

Flc: /* Dependent Variables */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language and Signs==
Language and signs encompass the linguistic and symbolic aspects of the assessment technique used in communication. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles, or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use of the technique or concept being assessed in general communication.
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment or concept being assessed.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|300px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T19:09:54Z

Flc: /* Dependent Variables */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language and Signs==
Language and signs encompass the linguistic and symbolic aspects of the assessment technique used in communication. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles, or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use of the technique or concept being assessed in general communication.
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment or concept being assessed.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|200px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

File:Dependent Variables.png

2026-08-17T19:08:12Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:Dependent Variables.png

File:GRI Model detailed variables.png

2026-08-17T19:05:14Z

Flc: Flc uploaded a new version of File:GRI Model detailed variables.png

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T15:41:33Z

Flc: /* (C-) Language, Signs */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language and Signs==
Language and signs encompass the linguistic and symbolic aspects of the assessment technique used in communication. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles, or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use of the technique or concept being assessed in general communication.
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment or concept being assessed.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|170px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T15:41:20Z

Flc: /* (C-) Language, Signs and Communication */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language, Signs==
Language and signs encompass the linguistic and symbolic aspects of the assessment technique used in communication. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles, or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use of the technique or concept being assessed in general communication.
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment or concept being assessed.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|170px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T15:39:04Z

Flc: /* (C-) Language and Signs */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language, Signs and Communication==
Language, signs, and communication encompass the linguistic and symbolic aspects of the assessment technique. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles, or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use of the technique or concept being assessed in general communication.
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment or concept being assessed.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|170px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T05:11:04Z

Flc: /* (Q-) Social performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language and Signs==
Language and signs include the linguistic and symbolic aspects associated with the assessment technique. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use in communication in general
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|170px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Well-being (Social) performance==
Well-being or Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Indicators and Their Measurement

2026-08-17T05:10:27Z

Flc: /* (P-) Strategic performance */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI Model_detailed_variables.png|right|450px]]
This article specifies the codes, indicators, and value attributions for the general framework’s variables. Nine are independent, four are antecedent, and three are dependent. The 16 variables are presented in the order below in the three categories.

The framework, its construction, and variables are presented in separate articles<ref>See more about the variables and their measurement [[Variables and Indicators |here in this article.]] [[ Research Methodology | See more about the history of the framework and its methodology here in this article.]]</ref>. Indicators are used to test hypotheses drawn from the framework against specific techniques, users, and companies as they deploy, in accordance with a publisher's model and a consultant's facilitation. The anticipated conclusions of testing hypotheses are also based on the indicators and their measurement. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions are discussed separately<ref>[[ Hypotheses Formulation | See more about the hypotheses formulation here in this article.]] [[ Anticipated Conclusions | See more about the anticipated conclusions here in this article.]]</ref>.

=Independent Variables=
The nine independent variables are shown in the middle of the framework in blue (See the illustration on the right). As explained during the hypothesis formulation, when building the framework, practical (light blue) and theoretical (dark blue) variables are analyzed distinctly. The three theoretical uses are more abstract and are present transversally in the six practical ones.

==(O-) Organizational Development==
Applications of assessment techniques in organizational development, such as defining job expectations and the organization at a strategic level, as well as in mergers and acquisitions, are associated with the concept of 'Use in organizational development'. The more varied and intense the use at the organizational level, the more it is associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators are used to measure the 'Use in organisational development’ variable, each with an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. They combine to form an overall indicator called 'isuorga.'

If any single indicator is very strong, it is enough to determine that 'isuorga' is very strong. If no factor is very strong and at least one factor is strong, then 'isuorga' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuorga' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuorga' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| O-CHAN || Manage organizational changes proactively.
|-
|O-FUSI || Acquisition, takeover, or merger of companies or project teams.
|-
| O-ORGA || Organization or reorganization of the company or a team.
|-
| O-POST || Refined definition of positions, including social behaviors (PBI).
|-
| O-PROJ || Construction and organization of a project team.
|-
| O-SCIS || Systematic use on teams, divisions, or the whole organization.
|-
| O-OTHR || Other uses in organizational development
|}

==(L-) Leadership==
The use in situations of leading and managing people is associated with the concept of 'use in leadership and management'. The more varied and intense the uses of leadership and management are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

16 indicators measure the 'use in leadership and management' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘management and leadership’ indicator called 'isulead'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulead' indicator is very strong. This indicates that the assessment technique is used in at least two of the listed applications. If no indicator is very strong and at least two factor are strong, then 'isulead' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulead' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulead' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| L-ADAP || Adapt to other people's styles
|-
| L-FOCO || Foster collaboration
|-
| L-AUTO || Autonomous use of the assessment technique
|-
| L-CONF || Manage conflicts and other organizational challenges, including low productivity, absenteeism, negative behavior, individual and collective conflicts, strikes, etc.
|-
| L-ENTR || Use in end-of-year interviews, and other interviews, excluding recruitment interviews
|-
| L-DEVE || Employee development
|-
| L-FEED || Feedback sessions are provided to team members
|-
| L-FIDE || Develop employees' loyalty and trust
|-
| L-HUMA || Attention is paid to people and social aspects, rather than remaining distant and focusing only on technical aspects
|-
| L-INCO || Onboard new team members
|-
| L-INTE || Communicate and interact with others
|-
| L-MODW || Model the way
|-
| L-MOTI || Motivate and engage employees
|-
| L-OBJC || Set objectives
|-
| L-PRES || Manage individual stress
|-
| L-OTHR || Other uses in leadership and management
|}

==(G-) Coaching==
The use of the assessment technique in coaching is associated with the concept of 'use in coaching'. The more varied and intense the uses in coaching are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Five indicators measure the 'use in coaching’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘coaching’ indicator called 'isucoch'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucoch' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucoch' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isucoch' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucoch' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|- G-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| G-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| G-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| G-ASSI || Assist with managerial and other team-related aspects
|-
| G-ENBL || Enable the coachee to express themselves and ask new questions
|}

==(S-) Recruitment==
The use of the assessment technique in recruitment is associated with the variable 'use in recruitment', which includes uses in selection, promotion, interviewing, onboarding, management of high potentials, and career planning. The more varied and intense the uses in recruitment are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Seven indicators measure the 'use in recruitment' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘recruitment’ indicator called 'isurecr'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isurecr' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isurecr' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one factor is low, then 'isurecr' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isurecr' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| S-RECR || Analysis of people during internal or external recruitment, with or without the assistance of an external consultant, a recruitment or search firm
|-
| S-ENTR || Recruitment interview
|-
| S-HYPO || Management of high potentials
|-
| S-PLAN || Succession planning
|-
| S-PROM || Promotion and reclassification of employees
|-
| S-REFE || Validation of referencing by a third party during recruitment
|-
| S-OTHR || Other uses in selection and recruitment
|}

==(N-) Clinical==
The use of the assessment technique in clinical settings is associated with the concept of 'use in clinical settings', which includes use in therapy, mental health treatment, and improving well-being. The more varied and intense the uses in clinical settings are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'use in clinical settings’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘clinical’ indicator called 'isuclin'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isuclin' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isuclin' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isuclin' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isuclin' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| N-CONN || Establish a connection with the patient, get to know them
|-
| N-SOLV || Helps prescribe a plan and solve issues
|-
| N-FEED || Provide feedback to the patient
|-
| N-OTHR || Other uses in therapy and clinical applications
|}

==(D-) Medium Effect==
The use of the assessment technique for its medium effects is associated with the concept of 'carries a medium effect', which helps to entertain and build relationships. The more varied and intense the uses of medium effects are, the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Four indicators measure the 'carries a medium effect’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘medium effect’ indicator called 'isumedi'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isumedi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isumedi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isumedi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| D-CONN || Establish a connection with the person, get to know them
|-
| D-SOLV || Helps establish a plan and solve issues
|-
| D-FEED || Provide feedback to the person
|-
| D-ANIM || Group presentation at a company's gathering
|}

==(A-) Self and Social Awareness==
The use of the assessment technique in self- and social-awareness is associated with the variable 'used in self- and social-awareness, which includes fostering personal growth, helping people identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, and of others. The more varied and intense the uses in self- and social-awareness are, the more the six other practical uses are as well, and the more they are associated with positive effects on performance.

Three indicators measure the 'improves self and social awareness' variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness'’ indicator called 'isucosa'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isucosa' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isucosa' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isumedi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isucosa' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| A-PERS || Understanding better oneself, of one's style and limits (self-awareness), of the organization of one's time, of one's efficiency, of one's role, etc.
|-
| A-COLA || Understanding of team members, their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|-
| A-AUTR || Understanding of other people in the organization in general, other than team members and direct reports: superiors, employees at the same hierarchical level, employees below level n-1, family, etc., of their style, strengths, limits, challenges, and talents.
|}

==(F-) Learning==
The learning includes initial training in the assessment technique, ongoing training in the field after initial training, and refreshers following the initial training. The 'quasi-autonomous learning process' is all the stronger as the initial training is followed by on-the-job learning, refresher sessions, and contact with the consultant. The stronger the learning process and the more adequate the learning content is, the more they are followed by strong uses in the six practical applications in organization, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical and medium effects.

Four indicators measure the value of the 'learning being nuanced and deep, and continuing over time’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall ‘improves self and social awareness’ indicator called 'isulear'.

If at least one indicator is very strong, we can say that the 'isulear' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least one indicator is strong, then 'isulear' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least one indicator is low, then 'isulear' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulear' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| F-SEMI || Participation in the initial training or masterclass.
|-
| F-TERR || Continued learning after training on the job and using the training resources.
|-
| F-RAFR || Deepening learning through participation in refresher courses.
|-
| F-OTHR || General use of the assessment technique in learning.
|}

==(C-) Language and Signs==
Language and signs include the linguistic and symbolic aspects associated with the assessment technique. The more the language and symbols resulting from the technique can convey meaning across the six practical and three theoretical uses, the more users can benefit from them and, subsequently, their organization.

Nine indicators make it possible to monitor the value of the 'results as a sign, and the language associated with it, facilitates their practical use’ variable. Each indicator is assessed on an ordinal scale of four values: very low, low, strong, and very strong. These indicators form an overall indicator called 'isulasi'.

If at least two indicators are very strong, we can say that the 'isulasi' indicator is very strong. If no indicator is very strong and at least two indicators are strong, then 'isulasi' is strong. If no indicator is very strong or strong and at least two indicators are low, then 'isulasi' is low. In other cases, we will say that 'isulasi' is very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| C-FACT || Use of the factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, factor interactions, adaptation, engagement level, and response level, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-INFE || Explicit statement of inferences from social behavior measures about individual or social skills, other qualities, or needs.
|-
| C-MORA || Reference to engagement or fit between the Natural and PBI; reference to the stability of the Natural, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-PROF || Verbal use of reference groups and profiles, and profiles such as the PBI and TBI, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-RANG || Organized to quickly access resources, individual profiles or other results and resources from the assessment technique.
|-
| C-SCSS || Explicit reference to the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles, or equivalent concepts when available.
|-
| C-VISU || Visual use of the adaptive profiles or other visual representations when available.
|-
| C-OTHR || Use in communication in general
|-
| C-REAN || Reference to any other language or symbolic aspects of the assessment.
|}

=Antecedent Variables=
[[File:Antecedent Variables.png|right|300px]]
There are four antecedent variables, which are displayed in yellow in the framework. Testing the framework with different techniques, users, environments, publishers, and consultants requires adjusting the values of the four antecedent variables and their indicators.

==(T-) Assessment Technique==
The analysis of assessment techniques highlights important qualities beyond those measured solely by psychometrics, which influence their use across different users and settings. Psychometric statistics, such as reliability and validity, are essential for understanding key aspects of assessment techniques. However, other aspects are also crucial for establishing their utility, predictive validity, and potential to improve individual and organizational performance.

The internal qualities of the measures, such as the intensity of the behaviors being measured or the scales used, determine what can be done with them. How the results are presented, whether as reports or diagrams, influences not only how they are learned and used but also how they participate in thought processes, how comparisons between people and job expectations can be made, and how new meaning and use continue to develop from those results. New meanings and uses apply to all six practical uses and the three other theoretical ones evidenced.

The assessment technique’s indicators were regrouped in four categories: (1) Upfront characteristics, (2) Intrinsic qualities, (3) Assessment Results, (4) Theory and Manual. The number of indicator for each sub-variable are indicated below:
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Sub-variable !! Nbr of Indicators
|-
| isaupfr || Upfront Characteristics || 6
|-
| isaintr || Intrinsic Qualities || 10
|-
| isaresu || Assessment Results || 6
|-
| isatheo || Theory and Manual || 6
|}

The four sub-variables are measured on an ordinal scale or in categories. When measured ordinally, the indicators take values of low, intermediate, or high. The four indicators 'isaupfr', 'isaintr', ‘isaresu’, and 'isatheo' form a general indicator 'isatech'.

'isatech' is high if the T-GVAL, T-GENU, and T-ROUT indicators are all high and at least 50% of the other indicators of 'isaupfr', ‘insaintr,’ 'isaresu,' and 'isatheo'; ie, at least three indicators of 'isaupfr', five of 'isaintr', three of 'isaresu' and three of 'isatheo' must be high. 'isatech' has an 'intermediate' value if 50% of the indicators are in intermediate or high value for each of the four sub-variables. Below, ‘ isatech’ is low.

Subvariable of 'isaupfr', assessing method
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NATR || Nature of the Concepts || Loosely defined and measured || In between || Explicitly defined and assessed objectively
|-
| T-INTR || Means || No tool is being used || Use a paper survey, which will eventually be uploaded for scoring. || Use the internet on a laptop or a mobile device
|-
| T-FACI || Immediacy || Difficult || Average || Easy
|-
| T-NAQU || Number of items || Many questions asked > 40 || Average number of questions asked: < 39 and > 11. || Few questions asked < 10
|-
| T-TMPS || Time || Length > 45 min || Average. Between 10 and 45 mins || Fast. < 10 min on average
|-
| T-PROJ || Forced or Free || Forced scenarios || Mixed free/forced || Free scenarios
|}

Subvariable of 'isaintr', Intrinsic Qualities
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-NMBR || Number of Facets || One dimension || Three dimensions || More than four dimensions
|-
| T-PARC || Parsimony || Many > to 30 facets || Between 7 and 30 facets || Limited < 7 facets
|-
| T-STAB || Stability || No evidence of the measure's stability || Stability of the measures is mentioned but unverified || The measure has shown some stability over more than 3 years
|-
| T-INTN || Scale, Intensity || Nominal scales. No intensity || Ordinal scales. Indirect understanding of intensity || Continuous scales (ratio or interval), intensity
|-
| T-ORTH || Orthogonality || Large overlap between the measured dimensions || The dimensions look distinct but still overlap || Minimum overlap between the dimensions being measured
|-
| T-ADAP || Adaptation || Not measured || Inferred but not measured || Measured with intensity
|-
| T-VALI || Formal Statistics || No Statistics available || A few statistics are available, but they are not relevant in the end || Meaningful Statistics available
|-
| T-RELA || Work relatedness || Dimensions are not related to work. || The measured dimensions include both work and non-work-related dimensions. || All dimensions are work-related.
|-
| T-DISC || Non-descrimination || Discrimination against people || No precise measure of non-discrimination || Proven non-discrimination measures
|-
| T-LANG || Language || One language || Less than a dozen languages || More than a dozen test languages
|}

Subvariable of 'isaresu', Assessment Results
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-REPR || Representation Model || Complex, lomg, constrained || Intermediate || Simple, quick, and unconstrained
|-
| T-LISI || Conciseness || Lengthy || Intermediate || Concise
|-
| T-GVAL || General Validity || Invalid || Neutral validity || Valid
|-
| T-GENU || General Utility || Low utility with few applications and users || Intermediate general utility || High utility with many applications and users.
|-
| T-PRIV || Privacy and Security || No privacy with no security || Intermediate privacy and security || High privacy and security measures that can potentially be enforced by the publisher and client.
|-
| T-ATCH || Attachment || No emotional attachment to the technique's history or its people || Intermediate emotional attachment || Strong emotional attachment to the technique's history and people
|}

Subvariable of 'isatheo', Theory and Manual
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code 6b !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| T-MODL || A priori Theory || Vague || Moderately expressed || Clearly expressed
|-
| T-ROUT || Assessment's Theory || No rules available || Diffuse rules available || Availability of clear rules
|-
| T-MANU || Publications || No manual available || Some information is available on paper or the Internet || Full reference manual available in electronic or print format
|-
| T-ENVA || Environment's acccount || NO account for the environment || Kind of account for the environment, and not explicitly || Account for the environment
|-
| T-AGES || Age and Context || Old > 50 years || Medium - 20 years || Recent < 3 years
|-
| T-JOUR || Updates || No update || Occasional updates || Frequent updates
|}

==(U-) User==
This ‘User’ variable measures the user’s characteristics that favor or refrain from the use of the assessment technique, as identified during the process analysis phase.

14 indicators measure the antecedent variable, each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a user indicator called 'isauser'.

The intensity of 'isauser' depends on the values of the indicators that compose it. It takes at least 50% of the indicators to be high, to say that 'isauser' is high; that is, 7 indicators. Same for the intermediate value: at least 50% of the indicators need to have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isauser' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator !! Low !! Intermediate !! High
|-
| U-ATST || Attitude towards answering an assessment || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-APRS || Attitude toward social behavior || Resistant || Skeptical || Positive
|-
| U-ATEP || Attitude toward the assessment technique || Confrontational || Doubtful || Open
|-
| U-ACNS || Attitude towards the facilitator || Distant || Skeptical || Open
|-
| U-HUMA || Interest in people and social aspects || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| U-ROVF || Operational vs functional role || Functional || Mixed functional/operational || Operational
|-
| U-EXPE || Leadership and management experience || <10 years or >30 years || N/A || More than 20 years
|-
| U-PRPE || Adaptive profile of the decision maker || "Controlling" || "Altruistic" || “Dominant”
|-
| U-TEST || Experience with other assessment techniques || Other assessments used || Some contacts with assessments || No experience
|-
| U-MAIT || Problems encountered in previous situations || Little difficult || Moderately difficult || Very difficult
|-
| U-DIRE || Directly concerned or not by the effects || Not concerned directly || Moderately concerned || Directly concerned
|-
| U-CONF || Confidence in using the personality assessment || Not confident || Moderately confident || Very confident
|-
| U-RECU || Recommendation provided for using the assessment || No recommendation provided || Positive recommendation provided when requested || Spontaneous recommendation provided
|-
| U-PRVH || Experience in HR, OD or Coaching || < 5 years || From 6 to 15 years || More than 15 years
|}

==(E-) Environment==
Organizations may favor implementing a new assessment technique before it is used, or along the way, as when it is used in one department and later in others. The social and political context, and how some techniques are influential at the industry or national level, will also partially determine their use. The 'Environment' variable regroups the characteristics identified during the process analysis under the headings 'organization’ and ‘environment', as their effects on using the assessment technique are similar.

20 indicators are used to measure the 'Environment' variable, each with an ordinal measurement on three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form an environment indicator called 'isaenvi'.

The intensity of 'isaenvi' depends on the indicators that compose it. At least 50% of the indicators must be high to say that 'isaenvi' is high. Same for the average value, which requires at least 50% of the indicators to be intermediate. Below, the intensity of 'isaenvi' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
| E-TAIL || Size of the company || Large: > 1000p and international bands || Medium: from 50 to 300p || Small: < 1000p
|-
| E-MATU || Organizational maturity || Start-up || Rapid organizational growth || Organisation mature
|-
| E-SECT || Industry sector || Administration || Industry || Service
|-
| E-CULT || Cultural embeddedness || Inexistence of the assessment in any situation || Episodic appearance of the assessment in a few situations || Assessment is part of the culture
|-
| E-POLI || Politicization of people's aspects || Very politicized || Moderately politicized || Weakly politicized
|-
| E-TEST || Prior use of techniques || Several techniques have been developed in different departments for different applications || Another technique is used in the organization for some applications || No other technique is used
|-
| E-PRES || Prior use of personality assessment || None || By another service || Across the organization
|-
| E-SRHU || Existence of a human resources department || No human resources department || Assistance in recruitment and provision of external advice || Human resources services are developed in various aspects
|-
| E-RHUM || Role of human resources (when applicable) || Admin role || Recruitment assistance || Involvement of the human resources department at the strategic level
|-
| E-FRUS || Interest in speaking the assessment language || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| E-RAPC || Relationship between the organization and outside consultant or facilitator || Non-existent || Episodic || Frequent
|-
| E-INTE || Global organization || None || Existence of at least one subsidiary abroad || Global organization established on all continents
|-
| E-CMPT || Environmental Competitiveness || Low competitive environment || Moderately competitive environment || Very competitive environment
|-
| E-DEVN || Long-term use of the assessment technique in the industry or country || Weakly developed at a national level || In progress. It's building || Assessment culture is firmly established at a national level
|-
| E-SYST || Adequacy of selection and promotion policies || Frequent calls to search and recruitment firms or external advice || Infrequent calls to outside firms || Strong autonomy for selection and occasional calls to outside firms
|-
| E-ADPI || Adequacy of remuneration and incentive systems || One-size-fits-all systems that ignore personality issues || Intermediate || Individual systems
|-
| E-ORGA || Adequacy of the organizational structure || Organizational processes that do not take assessment into account || Moderate consideration of personality issues in the processes || Strong consideration of the assessment in the processes
|-
| E-NIVP || Level of definition of positions with the personality assessment || Employees || Team lead and management level || Executive level
|-
| E-SYST || Systematization of the use of the assessment || Eventually, to confirm impressions || Frequent, and after the first interviews || Systematic, and before the first interview
|-
| E-NIVF || Individual with practical learning, knowledge, and experience in the assessment technique || Human resources || Management and HR ||
Executives, Management, and HR
|}

==(B-) Publisher and Consultant==
This variable includes indicators on how the assessment technique is implemented within the organization by the publisher, facilitator, or consultant. Two important aspects are considered: the level of autonomy provided by the 'publisher and consultant' and the skills offered. A deployment that allows significant autonomy and continues skill development through real-world cases encourages the use of the six practical and three theoretical application categories. Additionally, the consultant’s professional experience and the training they provide to users are essential factors that influence the technique's use.

Nine indicators measure the variable 'Publisher and Consultant', each with an ordinal scale of three values: low, intermediate, and high. They form a global indicator 'isapuco'.

The intensity of 'isapuco' depends on the intensity of the indicators that compose it. 'isapuco' is high if the 'B-TEDI' indicator is high and 50% of the other indicators are high; therefore at least four other indicators must be high in addition to 'B-TEDI'. 'isapuco' will have an intermediate value if 50% of the indicators have an intermediate value. Below, the intensity of 'isapuco' is low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator || Low || Intermediate || High
|-
|- B-OTHR || Consultant's input || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-INTE || Consultant's involvement || Service || Hybrid || Facilitation
|-
| B-EXDE || Consultant's expertise || Low || Moderate || High
|-
| B-BASE || Availability of manuals || Unavailable || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-EXPE || Accessibility of support || Inaccessible || Not easily accessible || Easily accessible
|-
| B-BUIS || Extent of assessment distribution || Confidential distribution || National distribution || Global distribution
|-
| B-TEDI || Assessment processing || Outsourced || Hybrid || Autonomous
|-
| B-TRAV || Training availability || No training || Unsystemtic || Training available
|-
| B-PLAV || Platform availability || No platform || Limited features available || Extended features available
|}

=Dependent Variables=
[[File:Dependent Variables.png|right|170px]]
The framework's dependent variables are represented in green as in the illustration on the right.
==(P-) Effective (Strategic) performance==
Effective or Strategic performance includes the realization of behaviors on the job as they are expected within the organization in the medium- and long-term.
The indicator 'iopstra' is created by comparing people’s Effective profile with the one expected in their position profiles (PBI), which are determined at a strategic level by the company's management.

Summing the individual indicators allows defining the indicator at the team or organization level. 'iopstra' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopstra' = 0: The individuals’ Effective profiles are the opposite of the social profiles expected in the teams and positions (from TBI and PBI).
* 'iopstra' = 1: The individuals’ Effective profiles are perfectly aligned with the social behaviors expected in the teams and positions (From TBI and PBI).

==(Q-) Social performance==
Social performance reflects aspects of engagement and being in flow at work, and thus the ability to deliver maximum performance and engagement. Social performance is observed by the objective indicator 'iopsoc' and two subjective indicators.
The first objective indicator 'iopsoc' measures the fit between the Natural and Role profiles from the adaptive profiles. The closer the Natural and Role are, the more in flow the person is. The more distant the Natural and the Role are, the more likely disengagement and negative emotions are.
The objective indicator ‘iopsoc’is obtained by combining the adaptation profiles’ adaptation and engagement values. 'iopsoc' takes a discrete value between 0 and 1.
* 'iopsoc' = 1: Satisfaction and engagement.
* 'iopsoc' = 0: Discomfort, dissatisfaction, and disengagement.
Social performance is also tracked by two indicators: Q-SAUT and Q-SELF. They are measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.

{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| Q-SAUT || Expression by respondents of the satisfaction of others in the organization.
|-
| Q-SELF || Expression by respondents of their own satisfaction.
|}

The 'iopsoc', Q-SAUT, and Q-SELF indicators form an overall social performance indicator 'igpsoc'. When the three indicators move in the same direction over time, the 'igpsoc' indicator moves in the same direction. Otherwise, the value of 'igpsoc' is indeterminate.

==(R-) Economic Performance==
Economic performance includes aspects that can be quantified and most often relate to financial or production objectives.

The economic performance indicators can include turnover, market penetration rate, return on investment, customer satisfaction survey results, absenteeism rate, etc. The indicators depend on each organization, agreed upon within the management team and, if applicable, with the board, shareholders, employees, or analysts.

The objective economic performance indicators are grouped under the indicator 'iopecon'.

Economic performance is also tracked using a subjective indicator, R-ECON. The indicator is measured on an ordinal scale with four values: very strong, strong, low, and very low.
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
! Code !! Indicator
|-
| R-ECON || Respondents' appreciation of their organization's financial and production performance.
|}

The 'iopecon' and M-ECON indicators form an overall economic performance indicator: 'igpecon'. When the two indicators move in the same direction over time, 'igpecon' does too. On the other hand, when the two indicators move in opposite directions to each other over time, 'igpecon' remains indeterminate.

=Notes=

[[Category:General Framework]]

Main Page

2026-08-12T17:35:57Z

Flc: /* Individual Characteristics */

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | GRI General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

Individual Characteristics

2026-08-12T17:20:04Z

Flc: /* Intelligence */

=Introduction=
[[File:Characteristics.png|right|220px]]
This article presents the individual characteristics that underpin everyone's assessments, decision-making, relationship-building, and performance characterization. Characteristics are major factors differentiating individuals. Many characteristics are naturally used in forming judgments, but only a few become significant when considering people’s roles and their management in organizations.

The above aspects are discussed, as well as how the characteristics can be classified to improve performance. Individual characteristics are not only about individuals but also shape expectations for the positions people occupy, how decisions will be made, and how communication will occur. Once a position is occupied, individual characteristics define a model for that position.

=Characteristics' Assessment=
The quality of characteristics is closely linked to the techniques used to assess them. At a minimum, private techniques are the most basic and widespread methods employed by anyone. If not private, techniques may include those used informally by organizations, esoteric techniques, and other approaches, such as semi-formal, formal, and statistical techniques<ref>The techniques are [[Assessment_Techniques | analyzed in this other article here]].</ref>.

The survey technique that uses a questionnaire and statistical analysis helps achieve more effective and objective measurements of certain characteristics. It is considered objective because the results are obtained without relying on someone else’s judgment. The interpretation or analysis may involve judgment, but not the measurement itself. Most characteristics are straightforward and can be easily assessed through private techniques. However, other characteristics, like abilities and social behavior, are more complex and harder to define. They benefit from a standardized process, the use of metrics, and the application of statistics, much like any other tool enhances human capabilities.

=The Big Seven=
[[File:Patchwork_Small.png|right|220px]]
Individual characteristics are numerous, although some may be regrouped; only a few are generally considered for performance. As noted above, some are easy to define and assess, while others are less so, even though they are critical. The seven characteristics shown here are commonly used in organizations. They help focus attention when assessing someone for a job, especially when several assessors are involved. Social behavior at the center is the most obvious, visible, and present; however, harder to assess objectively. This characteristic has been at the center of GRI's research project phase 1, which aimed to improve and define performance when social behavior measures were used by leaders and managers. The seven characteristics are as follows, with brief definitions. They are then detailed one by one before other characteristics are discussed.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
!Characteristic !! Brief Description
|-
| Social Behavior || The way people act, adapt, and become engaged from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint to eventually function in a state of flow.
|-
| Intelligence || The general mental ability that accounts for a person’s intellectual agility, memory capacity, and verbal fluency.
|-
| Values || The beliefs and ideas people have and value the most.
|-
| Abilities || The specific mental and physical aptitudes to perform, which may partially be innate.
|-
| Interests || The preference, attraction, and excitement of working in a job, to learn and execute tasks.
|-
| Skills || The competences, technical or social, that are related to an occupation.
|-
| Experience || The skills that are gained from executing tasks or in jobs over time.
|}

==Social Behavior==
[[File:Patchwork_Behavior.png|right|160px]]
Social behavior is how people act, adapt, and engage from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint. This component of personality can tell about how people function in a state of flow, interact, communicate, make decisions, manage, lead, learn, and more.

Social behavior is the characteristic we assess most spontaneously and naturally using our private techniques, but it is also the hardest to get right, given its nuances. As for measuring temperature, we may have a good intuition about it, but determining the exact room temperature is hard. It requires having an indication of what “exact” and “right” mean, an objective measure with a reference point, and a scale.

Personality is a broader concept than social behavior, sometimes equated with it, but also including psychiatric and clinical behaviors. Or personality can include cognitive processes such as intelligence that are not part of “social behavior” as we define it here. “Social behavior” encompasses a broad range of behaviors typically observed in people at work and in society, even when those behaviors are intense or extreme.

Understanding social behavior can be approximated by certain traits or types. Adaptive profiles from a factor-based approach, as we do at GRI, account for nuances, relative stability, and adaptation that other methods can’t. With appropriate metrics, the adaptive profile also provides insights into the intensity of social behavior, efforts to adapt, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, engagement in the job, and one's state of natural and effective flow.

Social behavior is about achieving results and performing like actors on stage by playing a role. Employees and everyone else do the same, like actors, to meet the expectations in their jobs, as they see them. Mindset can also refer to social behavior, as long as it is clear that it relates to how people think and feel about their own and others' behavior.

Social behavior is omnipresent in our activities. We experience, live them, and have observed them since we were born. They are facing us constantly. When we discuss people, that’s what we talk about. We all have our own sense of how to assess social behavior with our own vocabulary, its nuances, and what we refer to as our private techniques.

==Intelligence==
[[File:Patchwork_Intelligence.png|right|160px]]
Intelligence is a multifaceted concept, encompassing various theoretical frameworks and assessment techniques. It is commonly understood as involving cognitive, verbal, and memory capabilities. General Mental Ability (GMA), or intelligence, is often measured through standardized tests.

The assessment of intelligence has advanced significantly since the early 1900s, with the development of surveys and more sophisticated statistical methods. Early pioneers like Binet and Simon developed scales that introduced the concept of mental age, which later evolved into the use of standard IQ scores that measure specific abilities such as verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, non-verbal reasoning, and short-term memory. Other influential theories include Spearman's g-factor, which proposes a general intelligence factor alongside specific abilities, and Thurstone's identification of primary mental abilities. Subsequent research by various scholars further expanded the understanding of intelligence. Wechsler's scales, for example, distinguish between verbal, performance, and total IQs, moving beyond the earlier concept of mental age.

Hierarchical models have also emerged, combining different theoretical views to provide a broader understanding of intelligence. These models typically place a general intelligence factor at the top, with more specific factors and core abilities below it. Beyond traditional cognitive intelligence, emotional intelligence (EQ) has become increasingly important, highlighting a person's social skills, empathy, and self-awareness. Additionally, Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences proposes that individuals possess a wide range of distinct intelligences, challenging the idea of a single, universal measure of intelligence. In professional environments, proxy measures like educational achievements are often used to assess intelligence.

We can use our intellect to exert control over our social behavior, and we adapt as a result. But our ability to change our behavior in this way is limited. Although IQ is important in many jobs, and it is important to assess intelligence, how we behave and are motivated is distinct and uncorrelated with our IQ. Not only is this clear from research studies, but it is also demonstrated by the adaptive profiles. There is no single profile that is the smartest; anyone can be smart in their own way.

==Values==
[[File:Patchwork_Values.png|right|160px]]
Values are personal beliefs and principles that individuals consider important, shaping their attitudes, behaviors, and decisions across various areas of life, including work, society, religion, and politics. They act as an internal compass, establishing standards for what is viewed as appropriate and desirable.

The concept of value can be likened to interest, although values are generally considered more fundamental and widespread. When deeply rooted, values reflect strong preferences for certain activities and behaviors. In educational settings, values have been connected to academic choices and extracurricular involvement. While they are helpful for emphasizing desired behaviors, measuring values can be difficult because of their subjective and adaptable nature. For example, assigning "moral" values to someone in a particular context suggests their actions are consistent with a broad range of norms within that setting, often validated by selected examples from that individual.

Values, preferences, interests, and social behavior are interconnected. A person's value system offers guidelines for evaluating their own actions and those of others, shaping their attitudes and choices. This complex relationship between concepts is clarified by an individual's adaptive profile, which shows varying levels of behavior intensity and adaptation.

Personal values are also linked to cultural values and societal norms, and corporate values play a crucial role in establishing expectations and shared understandings within organizations, particularly regarding social behavior.

The value concept is [[Values | further developed in this article here.]]

==Abilities==
[[File:Patchwork_Abilities.png|right|160px]]
In psychology, the concept of abilities is closely related to that of intelligence. Abilities, as for instance in Thurstone's theory, include verbal comprehension and memory. Mental abilities and cognitive functions such as attention and language can be measured using assessment techniques.

In common language, abilities designate the manual or intellectual aptitudes to perform, which often imply inherent gifts or education. For example, a person might have a natural ability in an art, sport, or language. With that definition, abilities tend to remain stable throughout life and influence how people process information and execute tasks. Abilities differ from skills in that skills are also developed through learning and practice.
Abilities are more specific to certain roles: high verbal ability is valuable for writing, spatial ability is important for an engineer working in computer-aided design, and being 6 feet tall is valuable for performing in basketball and volleyball.

==Interests==
[[File:Patchwork_Interests.png|right|160px]]
Interests in executing some tasks and performing a job are the expression of a preference that excites attention and curiosity. In sports, for example, we speak of an interest in playing football or lacrosse. A person may be interested in working in one company or another, on an activity, with certain people, a team, and a manager, or under certain conditions. What’s more, interests grow over time. What a person is interested in builds through contact with others in real situations within organizations, through internships and apprenticeships, or by occupying and executing a job.

Interests can be of different natures, including social, financial, operational, and ethical. The way an organization balances and responds to these interests is critical for its success. Interest, engagement, and motivation work in concert for a person to perform in a job, overcome challenges, and deliver results efficiently. Interests—and lack of interest—is also informed by an adaptive profile from a behavioral standpoint, and the related emotions to perform in a job.

==Skills==
[[File:Patchwork_Skills.png|right|160px]]
Skills refer to the dexterity, speed, precision, and efficiency with which actions or cognition are performed. A skilled person is someone who can perform quickly and well. Skills can be manual and behavioral (overt behavior), or intellectual (covert behavior). We can evidence skills, for instance, in software coding, consulting, mechanical engineering, and accounting as well as in plumbing, welding, painting, or gardening. A skill is flexible and can be taught, practiced, and improved over time.

A skill is measurable and can be demonstrated through qualifications, certifications, and performance assessments. The concept of skills is distinct from that of intelligence or abilities in that it implies that it is acquired through deliberate practice, education, and experience. It similarly applies to managerial and social skills that can be learned and acquired with appropriate context, tools, and learning process.

==Experience==
[[File:Patchwork_Experience.png|right|160px]]
Unlike skills and behaviors learned in simulated or classroom settings, those gained through experience result from direct, concrete, and practical contact with facts or events. The reality, intensity, and diversity of those contacts give the skills and behaviors some nuances and meanings rooted in those situations. Being learned in the field, skills and behaviors derived from experience tend to be less general and more closely tied to specific contexts than those acquired more abstractly and deductively off the field.

Experience helps build an intuitive and nuanced appreciation of skills that allow one to act with ease, confidence, and speed. Experience can create agility, both physical and intellectual. Inexperience, on the other hand, may cause errors or delay execution, yet at the same time, it can also bring fresh insights and perspectives. A number of years of experience, however, cannot tell how skills were learned, expressed, or shared. Looking at experience, thus, always needs to be informed by how it builds, something that social behavior, as it is informed by an adaptive profile, can tell.

Experience is particularly important with managerial and social skills, often learned informally, through trial and error, by working with real people and situations. This kind of learning usually takes time. Experience is also essential for all expert manual or intellectual work that demands dexterity and precision. When learning social behavior with GRI’s adaptive profiles, creating meaning on symbols through real, practical, social experience is key, as it has been emphasized in the symbolic interactionism theory. Experience is also central to the concept of enactment, which designates the emergence of knowledge through the presence of individuals in the field.

=More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_More.png|right|220px]]
The characteristics used in organizations are not limited to these seven. Depending on the industry, company, country, and local influences, other concepts are applied that, in some way, overlap with the seven. A brief definition is provided below, including which other concepts they most closely compare to.

===Personality===
Personality is a broad concept that includes social behavior, intelligence, abilities, etc., and clinical behavior that is assessed by therapists and psychiatrists. The history of personality assessment started from psychiatry and therapy, and later expanded to large-scale recruitments. For this reason and for these applications, personality has been measured with traits. Social behavior, however, accounts for people’s behavior in the “normal” range, which does not include clinical behaviors.<ref>A brief history and prospects of personality assessment is[[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect | discussed in this article here.]]</ref>

===Character===
Like personality, character is a broad concept. It combines mental and ethical traits, such as honesty, courage, and integrity. Although character, values, and personality are three distinct concepts, they are interconnected. Personality is centered on how people act, values on beliefs, including moral ones, and character on mental and ethical qualities. All tend to explain how the others do. Social behavior overlaps with the three on how someone behaves, expresses themselves, and also thinks, and feels, including about their values and ethics.

===Competences===
The competence concept is a generic concept that combines skills, abilities, experiences, and more. Competency models focus on the management of knowledge and other characteristics acquired during training, most often, especially in large organizations, with HRMS (Human Resources Management System), Talent Management platforms, or Learning and development (L&D) platforms. Competency models are used by management and Human Resources to define, train, and use the competencies in recruitment, development, and succession planning. However, competency models underplay the emotions involved in developing behaviors and soft skills and often end up with lists of behavioral attributes that are conflicting. Competency management innately applies to technical rather than social skills.

===Attitudes===
Attitudes are considered to be antecedent to behaviors and of a cognitive, emotional, or sentimental nature or as a disposition to act. They may vary depending on the context or mood. Behaviors could be anticipated from the knowledge of someone’s attitudes. In everyday language, attitudes and behaviors are often used interchangeably. An attitude cannot be apprehended directly. Based on values and beliefs, attitudes are affected by the forces of the situation before being verbal or non-verbal behaviors and expressed. People most often act in accordance with their attitudes and intentions, which are themselves influenced by their values and motivation. Attitudes can be anticipated from affective, cognitive, and behavioral data as it is measured in the adaptive profile.

===Aptitudes===
An aptitude is the potential to perform certain activities, whether physical or mental, developed or undeveloped, in a particular domain. In psychology, the concept is close to that of abilities when viewed as inborn, or skills that can be developed by learning, or a combination of the two. In everyday language, aptitudes refer to the possibility of talents or skills for a person to occupy a position. Aptitude refers to a specific area: verbal, spatial, mechanical, business, management, critical thinking, logical reasoning, etc., that can be measured. Students get screened for aptitude through the SAT, GRE, GATE tests, or other certifications.

===Knowledge===
Knowledge is the information memorized by a person and the ability to use it when dealing with a specific topic. Knowledge often involves the possession of information learned through experience. We speak of knowledge of a foreign language, in computer science, biology, mechanics, management, culture, or any other general or specific field.

The storage and retrieval mechanisms make an unequivocal parallel with a computer’s functioning. A person’s knowledge must be distinguished from doing and acting on it, or the speed of processing information, which fall into the categories of social behavior and intelligence.

===Training===
By training, we mean classes, masterclasses, studies, courses, or programs attended by someone, which usually result in receiving a diploma or certificate. Training makes it possible to acquire knowledge and skills in a formal way through reading, role play, case studies, homework, presentations, pitches, etc., on a particular topic. A training predisposes a person to then express skills in a real context, adapting those skills and continuing to develop them in the field.

Compared to learning by experience, learning by training is more general, less specific to an environment, but is also more adaptable. It is less nuanced and trustworthy for not having yet been confronted with practical reality and for being only a "laboratory" repertoire.

===Culture & language===
The culture specifies the context in which a person’s skills, behaviors, and abilities were acquired: country, region, state, time, and other factors that condition the habits, language, food, norms, and protocols. Culture forms attitudes, values, personality, and social habits.

===Physical and health===
Physical and health characteristics are of particular importance in positions that require them, as for instance for delivery, being an athlete, acting a role on stage, being a fashion models who must have certain aesthetic or physiognomic dispositions.

===Talent===
Talent is a synonym for aptitude, natural abilities, and skills in a specific domain that can be work-related or not, extending to sports, music, and art in general. Some personality assessments use the word “talent” and a multiple typology approach to assist personal development and coaching, although they focus only on the social behavior component. By that definition, talent is part of someone's character, which needs to be understood and valued.

=Even More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_Even_More.png|right|220px]]
There are many additional characteristics beyond those listed above. Some may be surprising, but all have been observed at GRI over the years, including even esoteric ones, within an organizational context. Some characteristics can easily be obtained by social media or a resumé; Others by interview. Some are ethically and legally questionable. All characteristics can be related to their measurement techniques<ref>The assessment techniques[[ Assessment_Techniques | are discussed in this article here]]</ref>. Any distinctive characteristic on which an appreciation or judgment is potentially based must be considered.

The reality is that everyone bases their judgment on characteristics that are not explicitly articulated, such as when feeling embarrassment, doubt, or, conversely, confidence and validation, without being able to label the origin of those emotions. Professional recruiters, HR experts, and leaders are not exempt. Competence models and HRIS systems do not store them in files. However, judgment in recruiting, communicating, managing, and organizing is based on some of those characteristics, as it is for everyone.

Studies on leadership highlight characteristics such as appearance or clothing <ref>Bass B. M. (1990). </ref>. Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: theory, research, and managerial application. New York: Free Press. First published in 1974.</ref>. Gesture is emphasized in non-verbal communication<ref>Watzlavick P., Beavin H., Jackson, D. (1972). Une logique de la communication. Paris, Le Seuil.</ref>. Guittet regroups the characteristics of paralanguage into four categories<ref>Guittet, A. (1986). L’entretien. Paris, Armand Colin.</ref>:
* Posture: tone, gestures, bodily contact (handshakes, affectionate gestures, etc.), hand movements, crossing of legs, way of standing at the table, walking or standing in public.
* Body image: clothing choices that go along with fashion trends or not, giving a sign of belonging to a social group.
* Face and mimicry: micro verbal expressions, signs of attention, impatience, astonishment, support, or rejection. Eye movements, gaze fixed, fleeing, or determined, etc.<ref>Brandler, R., Grinder, J. (1984) Les secrets de la communication. Editions Reuille.</ref>
* Territory: the space that exists between individuals<ref>Hall, E. T. (1954). The silent language. New York, Doubleday.</ref>. It also concerns movements, agile, fast, and heavy.

Whether we want it or not, other characteristics get into our evaluations and judgments. It’s most often a matter of being aware of them and being educated to minimize or eliminate bias from them. The list continues:
* Age, height, weight, gender, skin color, and cultural and social origin
* Family and business connections
* Place of residence
* Association, political group, religious group, work team, committee, and more generally, the groups to which one belongs
* Corpulence (morphopsychology): endomorph, mesomorph, or ectomorph<ref> Kretschmer, E. (1936). Physique and Character. New York: Harcourt.</ref>
* The shape of the skull (phrenology) or the shape of the face
* Oral expression. The way of expressing oneself in public, in private. The intonations, pitch, or range of the voice. Eloquence
* The written expression. Fluency and writing style
* The astral theme according to the day and hour of birth (astrology)
* A person’s numbers (numerology)
* The hand’s lines, shapes, and features (palmistry)
* Handwriting (graphology)
* Someone’s gaze
* Eyes’ color<ref>Larsson M, Pedersen NL, Stattin H. Associations between iris characteristics and personality in adulthood. Biol Psychol. 2007 May;75(2):165-75. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.01.007. Epub 2007 Feb 1. PMID: 17343974.</ref>
* Physiological characteristics such as DNA, blood type (hematopsychology), or fingerprints
* The perception sensitivity in terms of taste, smell, sight, hearing, or touch
* The pleasant or repulsive smell<ref>There is this story about young adult Steve Jobs who had a repulsive smell, that went on for many years; An information obtained from people who worked with him. There are many similar other stories. Such cases are usually handled by managers, or if not HR.</ref>
* Food and body hygiene (dental hygiene analysis is still practiced in some Asian and African countries)
* How one shakes hands, has sweaty hands, opens or closes the door, sits, stands up, etc.

The list of characteristics is not complete, but all of the above have been seen in organizations. Some characteristics are kept private or only partly acknowledged. Attitudes toward oneself and others, along with development strategies, are influenced by the nature and strength of these characteristics and how much people believe in them.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]

Individual Characteristics

2026-08-12T17:19:24Z

Flc: /* Intelligence */

=Introduction=
[[File:Characteristics.png|right|220px]]
This article presents the individual characteristics that underpin everyone's assessments, decision-making, relationship-building, and performance characterization. Characteristics are major factors differentiating individuals. Many characteristics are naturally used in forming judgments, but only a few become significant when considering people’s roles and their management in organizations.

The above aspects are discussed, as well as how the characteristics can be classified to improve performance. Individual characteristics are not only about individuals but also shape expectations for the positions people occupy, how decisions will be made, and how communication will occur. Once a position is occupied, individual characteristics define a model for that position.

=Characteristics' Assessment=
The quality of characteristics is closely linked to the techniques used to assess them. At a minimum, private techniques are the most basic and widespread methods employed by anyone. If not private, techniques may include those used informally by organizations, esoteric techniques, and other approaches, such as semi-formal, formal, and statistical techniques<ref>The techniques are [[Assessment_Techniques | analyzed in this other article here]].</ref>.

The survey technique that uses a questionnaire and statistical analysis helps achieve more effective and objective measurements of certain characteristics. It is considered objective because the results are obtained without relying on someone else’s judgment. The interpretation or analysis may involve judgment, but not the measurement itself. Most characteristics are straightforward and can be easily assessed through private techniques. However, other characteristics, like abilities and social behavior, are more complex and harder to define. They benefit from a standardized process, the use of metrics, and the application of statistics, much like any other tool enhances human capabilities.

=The Big Seven=
[[File:Patchwork_Small.png|right|220px]]
Individual characteristics are numerous, although some may be regrouped; only a few are generally considered for performance. As noted above, some are easy to define and assess, while others are less so, even though they are critical. The seven characteristics shown here are commonly used in organizations. They help focus attention when assessing someone for a job, especially when several assessors are involved. Social behavior at the center is the most obvious, visible, and present; however, harder to assess objectively. This characteristic has been at the center of GRI's research project phase 1, which aimed to improve and define performance when social behavior measures were used by leaders and managers. The seven characteristics are as follows, with brief definitions. They are then detailed one by one before other characteristics are discussed.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
!Characteristic !! Brief Description
|-
| Social Behavior || The way people act, adapt, and become engaged from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint to eventually function in a state of flow.
|-
| Intelligence || The general mental ability that accounts for a person’s intellectual agility, memory capacity, and verbal fluency.
|-
| Values || The beliefs and ideas people have and value the most.
|-
| Abilities || The specific mental and physical aptitudes to perform, which may partially be innate.
|-
| Interests || The preference, attraction, and excitement of working in a job, to learn and execute tasks.
|-
| Skills || The competences, technical or social, that are related to an occupation.
|-
| Experience || The skills that are gained from executing tasks or in jobs over time.
|}

==Social Behavior==
[[File:Patchwork_Behavior.png|right|160px]]
Social behavior is how people act, adapt, and engage from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint. This component of personality can tell about how people function in a state of flow, interact, communicate, make decisions, manage, lead, learn, and more.

Social behavior is the characteristic we assess most spontaneously and naturally using our private techniques, but it is also the hardest to get right, given its nuances. As for measuring temperature, we may have a good intuition about it, but determining the exact room temperature is hard. It requires having an indication of what “exact” and “right” mean, an objective measure with a reference point, and a scale.

Personality is a broader concept than social behavior, sometimes equated with it, but also including psychiatric and clinical behaviors. Or personality can include cognitive processes such as intelligence that are not part of “social behavior” as we define it here. “Social behavior” encompasses a broad range of behaviors typically observed in people at work and in society, even when those behaviors are intense or extreme.

Understanding social behavior can be approximated by certain traits or types. Adaptive profiles from a factor-based approach, as we do at GRI, account for nuances, relative stability, and adaptation that other methods can’t. With appropriate metrics, the adaptive profile also provides insights into the intensity of social behavior, efforts to adapt, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, engagement in the job, and one's state of natural and effective flow.

Social behavior is about achieving results and performing like actors on stage by playing a role. Employees and everyone else do the same, like actors, to meet the expectations in their jobs, as they see them. Mindset can also refer to social behavior, as long as it is clear that it relates to how people think and feel about their own and others' behavior.

Social behavior is omnipresent in our activities. We experience, live them, and have observed them since we were born. They are facing us constantly. When we discuss people, that’s what we talk about. We all have our own sense of how to assess social behavior with our own vocabulary, its nuances, and what we refer to as our private techniques.

==Intelligence==
[[File:Patchwork_Intelligence.png|right|160px]]
Intelligence is a multifaceted concept, encompassing various theoretical frameworks and assessment techniques<ref> [[Intelligence | See a more complete discussion about intelligence in this article here]]</ref>. It is commonly understood as involving cognitive, verbal, and memory capabilities. General Mental Ability (GMA), or intelligence, is often measured through standardized tests.

The assessment of intelligence has advanced significantly since the early 1900s, with the development of surveys and more sophisticated statistical methods. Early pioneers like Binet and Simon developed scales that introduced the concept of mental age, which later evolved into the use of standard IQ scores that measure specific abilities such as verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, non-verbal reasoning, and short-term memory. Other influential theories include Spearman's g-factor, which proposes a general intelligence factor alongside specific abilities, and Thurstone's identification of primary mental abilities. Subsequent research by various scholars further expanded the understanding of intelligence. Wechsler's scales, for example, distinguish between verbal, performance, and total IQs, moving beyond the earlier concept of mental age.

Hierarchical models have also emerged, combining different theoretical views to provide a broader understanding of intelligence. These models typically place a general intelligence factor at the top, with more specific factors and core abilities below it. Beyond traditional cognitive intelligence, emotional intelligence (EQ) has become increasingly important, highlighting a person's social skills, empathy, and self-awareness. Additionally, Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences proposes that individuals possess a wide range of distinct intelligences, challenging the idea of a single, universal measure of intelligence. In professional environments, proxy measures like educational achievements are often used to assess intelligence.

We can use our intellect to exert control over our social behavior, and we adapt as a result. But our ability to change our behavior in this way is limited. Although IQ is important in many jobs, and it is important to assess intelligence, how we behave and are motivated is distinct and uncorrelated with our IQ. Not only is this clear from research studies, but it is also demonstrated by the adaptive profiles. There is no single profile that is the smartest; anyone can be smart in their own way.

==Values==
[[File:Patchwork_Values.png|right|160px]]
Values are personal beliefs and principles that individuals consider important, shaping their attitudes, behaviors, and decisions across various areas of life, including work, society, religion, and politics. They act as an internal compass, establishing standards for what is viewed as appropriate and desirable.

The concept of value can be likened to interest, although values are generally considered more fundamental and widespread. When deeply rooted, values reflect strong preferences for certain activities and behaviors. In educational settings, values have been connected to academic choices and extracurricular involvement. While they are helpful for emphasizing desired behaviors, measuring values can be difficult because of their subjective and adaptable nature. For example, assigning "moral" values to someone in a particular context suggests their actions are consistent with a broad range of norms within that setting, often validated by selected examples from that individual.

Values, preferences, interests, and social behavior are interconnected. A person's value system offers guidelines for evaluating their own actions and those of others, shaping their attitudes and choices. This complex relationship between concepts is clarified by an individual's adaptive profile, which shows varying levels of behavior intensity and adaptation.

Personal values are also linked to cultural values and societal norms, and corporate values play a crucial role in establishing expectations and shared understandings within organizations, particularly regarding social behavior.

The value concept is [[Values | further developed in this article here.]]

==Abilities==
[[File:Patchwork_Abilities.png|right|160px]]
In psychology, the concept of abilities is closely related to that of intelligence. Abilities, as for instance in Thurstone's theory, include verbal comprehension and memory. Mental abilities and cognitive functions such as attention and language can be measured using assessment techniques.

In common language, abilities designate the manual or intellectual aptitudes to perform, which often imply inherent gifts or education. For example, a person might have a natural ability in an art, sport, or language. With that definition, abilities tend to remain stable throughout life and influence how people process information and execute tasks. Abilities differ from skills in that skills are also developed through learning and practice.
Abilities are more specific to certain roles: high verbal ability is valuable for writing, spatial ability is important for an engineer working in computer-aided design, and being 6 feet tall is valuable for performing in basketball and volleyball.

==Interests==
[[File:Patchwork_Interests.png|right|160px]]
Interests in executing some tasks and performing a job are the expression of a preference that excites attention and curiosity. In sports, for example, we speak of an interest in playing football or lacrosse. A person may be interested in working in one company or another, on an activity, with certain people, a team, and a manager, or under certain conditions. What’s more, interests grow over time. What a person is interested in builds through contact with others in real situations within organizations, through internships and apprenticeships, or by occupying and executing a job.

Interests can be of different natures, including social, financial, operational, and ethical. The way an organization balances and responds to these interests is critical for its success. Interest, engagement, and motivation work in concert for a person to perform in a job, overcome challenges, and deliver results efficiently. Interests—and lack of interest—is also informed by an adaptive profile from a behavioral standpoint, and the related emotions to perform in a job.

==Skills==
[[File:Patchwork_Skills.png|right|160px]]
Skills refer to the dexterity, speed, precision, and efficiency with which actions or cognition are performed. A skilled person is someone who can perform quickly and well. Skills can be manual and behavioral (overt behavior), or intellectual (covert behavior). We can evidence skills, for instance, in software coding, consulting, mechanical engineering, and accounting as well as in plumbing, welding, painting, or gardening. A skill is flexible and can be taught, practiced, and improved over time.

A skill is measurable and can be demonstrated through qualifications, certifications, and performance assessments. The concept of skills is distinct from that of intelligence or abilities in that it implies that it is acquired through deliberate practice, education, and experience. It similarly applies to managerial and social skills that can be learned and acquired with appropriate context, tools, and learning process.

==Experience==
[[File:Patchwork_Experience.png|right|160px]]
Unlike skills and behaviors learned in simulated or classroom settings, those gained through experience result from direct, concrete, and practical contact with facts or events. The reality, intensity, and diversity of those contacts give the skills and behaviors some nuances and meanings rooted in those situations. Being learned in the field, skills and behaviors derived from experience tend to be less general and more closely tied to specific contexts than those acquired more abstractly and deductively off the field.

Experience helps build an intuitive and nuanced appreciation of skills that allow one to act with ease, confidence, and speed. Experience can create agility, both physical and intellectual. Inexperience, on the other hand, may cause errors or delay execution, yet at the same time, it can also bring fresh insights and perspectives. A number of years of experience, however, cannot tell how skills were learned, expressed, or shared. Looking at experience, thus, always needs to be informed by how it builds, something that social behavior, as it is informed by an adaptive profile, can tell.

Experience is particularly important with managerial and social skills, often learned informally, through trial and error, by working with real people and situations. This kind of learning usually takes time. Experience is also essential for all expert manual or intellectual work that demands dexterity and precision. When learning social behavior with GRI’s adaptive profiles, creating meaning on symbols through real, practical, social experience is key, as it has been emphasized in the symbolic interactionism theory. Experience is also central to the concept of enactment, which designates the emergence of knowledge through the presence of individuals in the field.

=More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_More.png|right|220px]]
The characteristics used in organizations are not limited to these seven. Depending on the industry, company, country, and local influences, other concepts are applied that, in some way, overlap with the seven. A brief definition is provided below, including which other concepts they most closely compare to.

===Personality===
Personality is a broad concept that includes social behavior, intelligence, abilities, etc., and clinical behavior that is assessed by therapists and psychiatrists. The history of personality assessment started from psychiatry and therapy, and later expanded to large-scale recruitments. For this reason and for these applications, personality has been measured with traits. Social behavior, however, accounts for people’s behavior in the “normal” range, which does not include clinical behaviors.<ref>A brief history and prospects of personality assessment is[[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect | discussed in this article here.]]</ref>

===Character===
Like personality, character is a broad concept. It combines mental and ethical traits, such as honesty, courage, and integrity. Although character, values, and personality are three distinct concepts, they are interconnected. Personality is centered on how people act, values on beliefs, including moral ones, and character on mental and ethical qualities. All tend to explain how the others do. Social behavior overlaps with the three on how someone behaves, expresses themselves, and also thinks, and feels, including about their values and ethics.

===Competences===
The competence concept is a generic concept that combines skills, abilities, experiences, and more. Competency models focus on the management of knowledge and other characteristics acquired during training, most often, especially in large organizations, with HRMS (Human Resources Management System), Talent Management platforms, or Learning and development (L&D) platforms. Competency models are used by management and Human Resources to define, train, and use the competencies in recruitment, development, and succession planning. However, competency models underplay the emotions involved in developing behaviors and soft skills and often end up with lists of behavioral attributes that are conflicting. Competency management innately applies to technical rather than social skills.

===Attitudes===
Attitudes are considered to be antecedent to behaviors and of a cognitive, emotional, or sentimental nature or as a disposition to act. They may vary depending on the context or mood. Behaviors could be anticipated from the knowledge of someone’s attitudes. In everyday language, attitudes and behaviors are often used interchangeably. An attitude cannot be apprehended directly. Based on values and beliefs, attitudes are affected by the forces of the situation before being verbal or non-verbal behaviors and expressed. People most often act in accordance with their attitudes and intentions, which are themselves influenced by their values and motivation. Attitudes can be anticipated from affective, cognitive, and behavioral data as it is measured in the adaptive profile.

===Aptitudes===
An aptitude is the potential to perform certain activities, whether physical or mental, developed or undeveloped, in a particular domain. In psychology, the concept is close to that of abilities when viewed as inborn, or skills that can be developed by learning, or a combination of the two. In everyday language, aptitudes refer to the possibility of talents or skills for a person to occupy a position. Aptitude refers to a specific area: verbal, spatial, mechanical, business, management, critical thinking, logical reasoning, etc., that can be measured. Students get screened for aptitude through the SAT, GRE, GATE tests, or other certifications.

===Knowledge===
Knowledge is the information memorized by a person and the ability to use it when dealing with a specific topic. Knowledge often involves the possession of information learned through experience. We speak of knowledge of a foreign language, in computer science, biology, mechanics, management, culture, or any other general or specific field.

The storage and retrieval mechanisms make an unequivocal parallel with a computer’s functioning. A person’s knowledge must be distinguished from doing and acting on it, or the speed of processing information, which fall into the categories of social behavior and intelligence.

===Training===
By training, we mean classes, masterclasses, studies, courses, or programs attended by someone, which usually result in receiving a diploma or certificate. Training makes it possible to acquire knowledge and skills in a formal way through reading, role play, case studies, homework, presentations, pitches, etc., on a particular topic. A training predisposes a person to then express skills in a real context, adapting those skills and continuing to develop them in the field.

Compared to learning by experience, learning by training is more general, less specific to an environment, but is also more adaptable. It is less nuanced and trustworthy for not having yet been confronted with practical reality and for being only a "laboratory" repertoire.

===Culture & language===
The culture specifies the context in which a person’s skills, behaviors, and abilities were acquired: country, region, state, time, and other factors that condition the habits, language, food, norms, and protocols. Culture forms attitudes, values, personality, and social habits.

===Physical and health===
Physical and health characteristics are of particular importance in positions that require them, as for instance for delivery, being an athlete, acting a role on stage, being a fashion models who must have certain aesthetic or physiognomic dispositions.

===Talent===
Talent is a synonym for aptitude, natural abilities, and skills in a specific domain that can be work-related or not, extending to sports, music, and art in general. Some personality assessments use the word “talent” and a multiple typology approach to assist personal development and coaching, although they focus only on the social behavior component. By that definition, talent is part of someone's character, which needs to be understood and valued.

=Even More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_Even_More.png|right|220px]]
There are many additional characteristics beyond those listed above. Some may be surprising, but all have been observed at GRI over the years, including even esoteric ones, within an organizational context. Some characteristics can easily be obtained by social media or a resumé; Others by interview. Some are ethically and legally questionable. All characteristics can be related to their measurement techniques<ref>The assessment techniques[[ Assessment_Techniques | are discussed in this article here]]</ref>. Any distinctive characteristic on which an appreciation or judgment is potentially based must be considered.

The reality is that everyone bases their judgment on characteristics that are not explicitly articulated, such as when feeling embarrassment, doubt, or, conversely, confidence and validation, without being able to label the origin of those emotions. Professional recruiters, HR experts, and leaders are not exempt. Competence models and HRIS systems do not store them in files. However, judgment in recruiting, communicating, managing, and organizing is based on some of those characteristics, as it is for everyone.

Studies on leadership highlight characteristics such as appearance or clothing <ref>Bass B. M. (1990). </ref>. Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: theory, research, and managerial application. New York: Free Press. First published in 1974.</ref>. Gesture is emphasized in non-verbal communication<ref>Watzlavick P., Beavin H., Jackson, D. (1972). Une logique de la communication. Paris, Le Seuil.</ref>. Guittet regroups the characteristics of paralanguage into four categories<ref>Guittet, A. (1986). L’entretien. Paris, Armand Colin.</ref>:
* Posture: tone, gestures, bodily contact (handshakes, affectionate gestures, etc.), hand movements, crossing of legs, way of standing at the table, walking or standing in public.
* Body image: clothing choices that go along with fashion trends or not, giving a sign of belonging to a social group.
* Face and mimicry: micro verbal expressions, signs of attention, impatience, astonishment, support, or rejection. Eye movements, gaze fixed, fleeing, or determined, etc.<ref>Brandler, R., Grinder, J. (1984) Les secrets de la communication. Editions Reuille.</ref>
* Territory: the space that exists between individuals<ref>Hall, E. T. (1954). The silent language. New York, Doubleday.</ref>. It also concerns movements, agile, fast, and heavy.

Whether we want it or not, other characteristics get into our evaluations and judgments. It’s most often a matter of being aware of them and being educated to minimize or eliminate bias from them. The list continues:
* Age, height, weight, gender, skin color, and cultural and social origin
* Family and business connections
* Place of residence
* Association, political group, religious group, work team, committee, and more generally, the groups to which one belongs
* Corpulence (morphopsychology): endomorph, mesomorph, or ectomorph<ref> Kretschmer, E. (1936). Physique and Character. New York: Harcourt.</ref>
* The shape of the skull (phrenology) or the shape of the face
* Oral expression. The way of expressing oneself in public, in private. The intonations, pitch, or range of the voice. Eloquence
* The written expression. Fluency and writing style
* The astral theme according to the day and hour of birth (astrology)
* A person’s numbers (numerology)
* The hand’s lines, shapes, and features (palmistry)
* Handwriting (graphology)
* Someone’s gaze
* Eyes’ color<ref>Larsson M, Pedersen NL, Stattin H. Associations between iris characteristics and personality in adulthood. Biol Psychol. 2007 May;75(2):165-75. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.01.007. Epub 2007 Feb 1. PMID: 17343974.</ref>
* Physiological characteristics such as DNA, blood type (hematopsychology), or fingerprints
* The perception sensitivity in terms of taste, smell, sight, hearing, or touch
* The pleasant or repulsive smell<ref>There is this story about young adult Steve Jobs who had a repulsive smell, that went on for many years; An information obtained from people who worked with him. There are many similar other stories. Such cases are usually handled by managers, or if not HR.</ref>
* Food and body hygiene (dental hygiene analysis is still practiced in some Asian and African countries)
* How one shakes hands, has sweaty hands, opens or closes the door, sits, stands up, etc.

The list of characteristics is not complete, but all of the above have been seen in organizations. Some characteristics are kept private or only partly acknowledged. Attitudes toward oneself and others, along with development strategies, are influenced by the nature and strength of these characteristics and how much people believe in them.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]

Individual Characteristics

2026-08-12T17:15:57Z

Flc: /* Characteristics' Assessment */

Individual Characteristics

2026-08-12T17:10:48Z

Flc: /* The Big Seven */

=Introduction=
[[File:Characteristics.png|right|220px]]
This article presents the individual characteristics that underpin everyone's assessments, decision-making, relationship-building, and performance characterization. Characteristics are major factors differentiating individuals. Many characteristics are naturally used in forming judgments, but only a few become significant when considering people’s roles and their management in organizations.

The above aspects are discussed, as well as how the characteristics can be classified to improve performance. Individual characteristics are not only about individuals but also shape expectations for the positions people occupy, how decisions will be made, and how communication will occur. Once a position is occupied, individual characteristics define a model for that position.

=Characteristics' Assessment=
The quality of characteristics is closely linked to the techniques used to assess them. At a minimum, private techniques are the most basic and widespread methods employed by anyone. If not private, techniques may include those used informatively by organizations, esoteric techniques, and other approaches, such as semi-formal, formal, and statistical techniques<ref>The techniques are [[Assessment_Techniques | analyzed in this other article here]].</ref>.

The survey technique that uses a questionnaire and statistical analysis helps achieve a more effective and objective measurement of certain characteristics. It is considered objective because the results are obtained without relying on someone else’s judgment. The interpretation or analysis may involve judgment, but not the measurement itself. Most characteristics are straightforward and can be easily assessed through private techniques. However, other characteristics like abilities and social behavior are more complex and harder to define. They benefit from a standardized process, the use of metrics, and the application of statistics, similar to how any other tool enhances human capabilities.

=The Big Seven=
[[File:Patchwork_Small.png|right|220px]]
Individual characteristics are numerous, although some may be regrouped; only a few are generally considered for performance. As noted above, some are easy to define and assess, while others are less so, even though they are critical. The seven characteristics shown here are commonly used in organizations. They help focus attention when assessing someone for a job, especially when several assessors are involved. Social behavior at the center is the most obvious, visible, and present; however, harder to assess objectively. This characteristic has been at the center of GRI's research project phase 1, which aimed to improve and define performance when social behavior measures were used by leaders and managers. The seven characteristics are as follows, with brief definitions. They are then detailed one by one before other characteristics are discussed.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
!Characteristic !! Brief Description
|-
| Social Behavior || The way people act, adapt, and become engaged from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint to eventually function in a state of flow.
|-
| Intelligence || The general mental ability that accounts for a person’s intellectual agility, memory capacity, and verbal fluency.
|-
| Values || The beliefs and ideas people have and value the most.
|-
| Abilities || The specific mental and physical aptitudes to perform, which may partially be innate.
|-
| Interests || The preference, attraction, and excitement of working in a job, to learn and execute tasks.
|-
| Skills || The competences, technical or social, that are related to an occupation.
|-
| Experience || The skills that are gained from executing tasks or in jobs over time.
|}

==Social Behavior==
[[File:Patchwork_Behavior.png|right|160px]]
Social behavior is how people act, adapt, and engage from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint. This component of personality can tell about how people function in a state of flow, interact, communicate, make decisions, manage, lead, learn, and more.

Social behavior is the characteristic we assess most spontaneously and naturally using our private techniques, but it is also the hardest to get right, given its nuances. As for measuring temperature, we may have a good intuition about it, but determining the exact room temperature is hard. It requires having an indication of what “exact” and “right” mean, an objective measure with a reference point, and a scale.

Personality is a broader concept than social behavior, sometimes equated with it, but also including psychiatric and clinical behaviors. Or personality can include cognitive processes such as intelligence that are not part of “social behavior” as we define it here. “Social behavior” encompasses a broad range of behaviors typically observed in people at work and in society, even when those behaviors are intense or extreme.

Understanding social behavior can be approximated by certain traits or types. Adaptive profiles from a factor-based approach, as we do at GRI, account for nuances, relative stability, and adaptation that other methods can’t. With appropriate metrics, the adaptive profile also provides insights into the intensity of social behavior, efforts to adapt, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, engagement in the job, and one's state of natural and effective flow.

Social behavior is about achieving results and performing like actors on stage by playing a role. Employees and everyone else do the same, like actors, to meet the expectations in their jobs, as they see them. Mindset can also refer to social behavior, as long as it is clear that it relates to how people think and feel about their own and others' behavior.

Social behavior is omnipresent in our activities. We experience, live them, and have observed them since we were born. They are facing us constantly. When we discuss people, that’s what we talk about. We all have our own sense of how to assess social behavior with our own vocabulary, its nuances, and what we refer to as our private techniques.

==Intelligence==
[[File:Patchwork_Intelligence.png|right|160px]]
Intelligence is a multifaceted concept, encompassing various theoretical frameworks and assessment techniques. It is commonly understood as involving cognitive, verbal, and memory capabilities. General Mental Ability (GMA), or intelligence, is often measured through standardized tests.

The assessment of intelligence has advanced significantly since the early 1900s, with the development of surveys and more sophisticated statistical methods. Early pioneers like Binet and Simon developed scales that introduced the concept of mental age, which later evolved into the use of standard IQ scores that measure specific abilities such as verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, non-verbal reasoning, and short-term memory. Other influential theories include Spearman's g-factor, which proposes a general intelligence factor alongside specific abilities, and Thurstone's identification of primary mental abilities. Subsequent research by various scholars further expanded the understanding of intelligence. Wechsler's scales, for example, distinguish between verbal, performance, and total IQs, moving beyond the earlier concept of mental age.

Hierarchical models have also emerged, combining different theoretical views to provide a broader understanding of intelligence. These models typically place a general intelligence factor at the top, with more specific factors and core abilities below it. Beyond traditional cognitive intelligence, emotional intelligence (EQ) has become increasingly important, highlighting a person's social skills, empathy, and self-awareness. Additionally, Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences proposes that individuals possess a wide range of distinct intelligences, challenging the idea of a single, universal measure of intelligence. In professional environments, proxy measures like educational achievements are often used to assess intelligence.

We can use our intellect to exert control over our social behavior, and we adapt as a result. But our ability to change our behavior in this way is limited. Although IQ is important in many jobs, and it is important to assess intelligence, how we behave and are motivated is distinct and uncorrelated with our IQ. Not only is this clear from research studies, but it is also demonstrated by the adaptive profiles. There is no single profile that is the smartest; anyone can be smart in their own way.

==Values==
[[File:Patchwork_Values.png|right|160px]]
Values are personal beliefs and principles that individuals consider important, shaping their attitudes, behaviors, and decisions across various areas of life, including work, society, religion, and politics. They act as an internal compass, establishing standards for what is viewed as appropriate and desirable.

The concept of value can be likened to interest, although values are generally considered more fundamental and widespread. When deeply rooted, values reflect strong preferences for certain activities and behaviors. In educational settings, values have been connected to academic choices and extracurricular involvement. While they are helpful for emphasizing desired behaviors, measuring values can be difficult because of their subjective and adaptable nature. For example, assigning "moral" values to someone in a particular context suggests their actions are consistent with a broad range of norms within that setting, often validated by selected examples from that individual.

Values, preferences, interests, and social behavior are interconnected. A person's value system offers guidelines for evaluating their own actions and those of others, shaping their attitudes and choices. This complex relationship between concepts is clarified by an individual's adaptive profile, which shows varying levels of behavior intensity and adaptation.

Personal values are also linked to cultural values and societal norms, and corporate values play a crucial role in establishing expectations and shared understandings within organizations, particularly regarding social behavior.

The value concept is [[Values | further developed in this article here.]]

==Abilities==
[[File:Patchwork_Abilities.png|right|160px]]
In psychology, the concept of abilities is closely related to that of intelligence. Abilities, as for instance in Thurstone's theory, include verbal comprehension and memory. Mental abilities and cognitive functions such as attention and language can be measured using assessment techniques.

In common language, abilities designate the manual or intellectual aptitudes to perform, which often imply inherent gifts or education. For example, a person might have a natural ability in an art, sport, or language. With that definition, abilities tend to remain stable throughout life and influence how people process information and execute tasks. Abilities differ from skills in that skills are also developed through learning and practice.
Abilities are more specific to certain roles: high verbal ability is valuable for writing, spatial ability is important for an engineer working in computer-aided design, and being 6 feet tall is valuable for performing in basketball and volleyball.

==Interests==
[[File:Patchwork_Interests.png|right|160px]]
Interests in executing some tasks and performing a job are the expression of a preference that excites attention and curiosity. In sports, for example, we speak of an interest in playing football or lacrosse. A person may be interested in working in one company or another, on an activity, with certain people, a team, and a manager, or under certain conditions. What’s more, interests grow over time. What a person is interested in builds through contact with others in real situations within organizations, through internships and apprenticeships, or by occupying and executing a job.

Interests can be of different natures, including social, financial, operational, and ethical. The way an organization balances and responds to these interests is critical for its success. Interest, engagement, and motivation work in concert for a person to perform in a job, overcome challenges, and deliver results efficiently. Interests—and lack of interest—is also informed by an adaptive profile from a behavioral standpoint, and the related emotions to perform in a job.

==Skills==
[[File:Patchwork_Skills.png|right|160px]]
Skills refer to the dexterity, speed, precision, and efficiency with which actions or cognition are performed. A skilled person is someone who can perform quickly and well. Skills can be manual and behavioral (overt behavior), or intellectual (covert behavior). We can evidence skills, for instance, in software coding, consulting, mechanical engineering, and accounting as well as in plumbing, welding, painting, or gardening. A skill is flexible and can be taught, practiced, and improved over time.

A skill is measurable and can be demonstrated through qualifications, certifications, and performance assessments. The concept of skills is distinct from that of intelligence or abilities in that it implies that it is acquired through deliberate practice, education, and experience. It similarly applies to managerial and social skills that can be learned and acquired with appropriate context, tools, and learning process.

==Experience==
[[File:Patchwork_Experience.png|right|160px]]
Unlike skills and behaviors learned in simulated or classroom settings, those gained through experience result from direct, concrete, and practical contact with facts or events. The reality, intensity, and diversity of those contacts give the skills and behaviors some nuances and meanings rooted in those situations. Being learned in the field, skills and behaviors derived from experience tend to be less general and more closely tied to specific contexts than those acquired more abstractly and deductively off the field.

Experience helps build an intuitive and nuanced appreciation of skills that allow one to act with ease, confidence, and speed. Experience can create agility, both physical and intellectual. Inexperience, on the other hand, may cause errors or delay execution, yet at the same time, it can also bring fresh insights and perspectives. A number of years of experience, however, cannot tell how skills were learned, expressed, or shared. Looking at experience, thus, always needs to be informed by how it builds, something that social behavior, as it is informed by an adaptive profile, can tell.

Experience is particularly important with managerial and social skills, often learned informally, through trial and error, by working with real people and situations. This kind of learning usually takes time. Experience is also essential for all expert manual or intellectual work that demands dexterity and precision. When learning social behavior with GRI’s adaptive profiles, creating meaning on symbols through real, practical, social experience is key, as it has been emphasized in the symbolic interactionism theory. Experience is also central to the concept of enactment, which designates the emergence of knowledge through the presence of individuals in the field.

=More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_More.png|right|220px]]
The characteristics used in organizations are not limited to these seven. Depending on the industry, company, country, and local influences, other concepts are applied that, in some way, overlap with the seven. A brief definition is provided below, including which other concepts they most closely compare to.

===Personality===
Personality is a broad concept that includes social behavior, intelligence, abilities, etc., and clinical behavior that is assessed by therapists and psychiatrists. The history of personality assessment started from psychiatry and therapy, and later expanded to large-scale recruitments. For this reason and for these applications, personality has been measured with traits. Social behavior, however, accounts for people’s behavior in the “normal” range, which does not include clinical behaviors.<ref>A brief history and prospects of personality assessment is[[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect | discussed in this article here.]]</ref>

===Character===
Like personality, character is a broad concept. It combines mental and ethical traits, such as honesty, courage, and integrity. Although character, values, and personality are three distinct concepts, they are interconnected. Personality is centered on how people act, values on beliefs, including moral ones, and character on mental and ethical qualities. All tend to explain how the others do. Social behavior overlaps with the three on how someone behaves, expresses themselves, and also thinks, and feels, including about their values and ethics.

===Competences===
The competence concept is a generic concept that combines skills, abilities, experiences, and more. Competency models focus on the management of knowledge and other characteristics acquired during training, most often, especially in large organizations, with HRMS (Human Resources Management System), Talent Management platforms, or Learning and development (L&D) platforms. Competency models are used by management and Human Resources to define, train, and use the competencies in recruitment, development, and succession planning. However, competency models underplay the emotions involved in developing behaviors and soft skills and often end up with lists of behavioral attributes that are conflicting. Competency management innately applies to technical rather than social skills.

===Attitudes===
Attitudes are considered to be antecedent to behaviors and of a cognitive, emotional, or sentimental nature or as a disposition to act. They may vary depending on the context or mood. Behaviors could be anticipated from the knowledge of someone’s attitudes. In everyday language, attitudes and behaviors are often used interchangeably. An attitude cannot be apprehended directly. Based on values and beliefs, attitudes are affected by the forces of the situation before being verbal or non-verbal behaviors and expressed. People most often act in accordance with their attitudes and intentions, which are themselves influenced by their values and motivation. Attitudes can be anticipated from affective, cognitive, and behavioral data as it is measured in the adaptive profile.

===Aptitudes===
An aptitude is the potential to perform certain activities, whether physical or mental, developed or undeveloped, in a particular domain. In psychology, the concept is close to that of abilities when viewed as inborn, or skills that can be developed by learning, or a combination of the two. In everyday language, aptitudes refer to the possibility of talents or skills for a person to occupy a position. Aptitude refers to a specific area: verbal, spatial, mechanical, business, management, critical thinking, logical reasoning, etc., that can be measured. Students get screened for aptitude through the SAT, GRE, GATE tests, or other certifications.

===Knowledge===
Knowledge is the information memorized by a person and the ability to use it when dealing with a specific topic. Knowledge often involves the possession of information learned through experience. We speak of knowledge of a foreign language, in computer science, biology, mechanics, management, culture, or any other general or specific field.

The storage and retrieval mechanisms make an unequivocal parallel with a computer’s functioning. A person’s knowledge must be distinguished from doing and acting on it, or the speed of processing information, which fall into the categories of social behavior and intelligence.

===Training===
By training, we mean classes, masterclasses, studies, courses, or programs attended by someone, which usually result in receiving a diploma or certificate. Training makes it possible to acquire knowledge and skills in a formal way through reading, role play, case studies, homework, presentations, pitches, etc., on a particular topic. A training predisposes a person to then express skills in a real context, adapting those skills and continuing to develop them in the field.

Compared to learning by experience, learning by training is more general, less specific to an environment, but is also more adaptable. It is less nuanced and trustworthy for not having yet been confronted with practical reality and for being only a "laboratory" repertoire.

===Culture & language===
The culture specifies the context in which a person’s skills, behaviors, and abilities were acquired: country, region, state, time, and other factors that condition the habits, language, food, norms, and protocols. Culture forms attitudes, values, personality, and social habits.

===Physical and health===
Physical and health characteristics are of particular importance in positions that require them, as for instance for delivery, being an athlete, acting a role on stage, being a fashion models who must have certain aesthetic or physiognomic dispositions.

===Talent===
Talent is a synonym for aptitude, natural abilities, and skills in a specific domain that can be work-related or not, extending to sports, music, and art in general. Some personality assessments use the word “talent” and a multiple typology approach to assist personal development and coaching, although they focus only on the social behavior component. By that definition, talent is part of someone's character, which needs to be understood and valued.

=Even More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_Even_More.png|right|220px]]
There are many additional characteristics beyond those listed above. Some may be surprising, but all have been observed at GRI over the years, including even esoteric ones, within an organizational context. Some characteristics can easily be obtained by social media or a resumé; Others by interview. Some are ethically and legally questionable. All characteristics can be related to their measurement techniques<ref>The assessment techniques[[ Assessment_Techniques | are discussed in this article here]]</ref>. Any distinctive characteristic on which an appreciation or judgment is potentially based must be considered.

The reality is that everyone bases their judgment on characteristics that are not explicitly articulated, such as when feeling embarrassment, doubt, or, conversely, confidence and validation, without being able to label the origin of those emotions. Professional recruiters, HR experts, and leaders are not exempt. Competence models and HRIS systems do not store them in files. However, judgment in recruiting, communicating, managing, and organizing is based on some of those characteristics, as it is for everyone.

Studies on leadership highlight characteristics such as appearance or clothing <ref>Bass B. M. (1990). </ref>. Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: theory, research, and managerial application. New York: Free Press. First published in 1974.</ref>. Gesture is emphasized in non-verbal communication<ref>Watzlavick P., Beavin H., Jackson, D. (1972). Une logique de la communication. Paris, Le Seuil.</ref>. Guittet regroups the characteristics of paralanguage into four categories<ref>Guittet, A. (1986). L’entretien. Paris, Armand Colin.</ref>:
* Posture: tone, gestures, bodily contact (handshakes, affectionate gestures, etc.), hand movements, crossing of legs, way of standing at the table, walking or standing in public.
* Body image: clothing choices that go along with fashion trends or not, giving a sign of belonging to a social group.
* Face and mimicry: micro verbal expressions, signs of attention, impatience, astonishment, support, or rejection. Eye movements, gaze fixed, fleeing, or determined, etc.<ref>Brandler, R., Grinder, J. (1984) Les secrets de la communication. Editions Reuille.</ref>
* Territory: the space that exists between individuals<ref>Hall, E. T. (1954). The silent language. New York, Doubleday.</ref>. It also concerns movements, agile, fast, and heavy.

Whether we want it or not, other characteristics get into our evaluations and judgments. It’s most often a matter of being aware of them and being educated to minimize or eliminate bias from them. The list continues:
* Age, height, weight, gender, skin color, and cultural and social origin
* Family and business connections
* Place of residence
* Association, political group, religious group, work team, committee, and more generally, the groups to which one belongs
* Corpulence (morphopsychology): endomorph, mesomorph, or ectomorph<ref> Kretschmer, E. (1936). Physique and Character. New York: Harcourt.</ref>
* The shape of the skull (phrenology) or the shape of the face
* Oral expression. The way of expressing oneself in public, in private. The intonations, pitch, or range of the voice. Eloquence
* The written expression. Fluency and writing style
* The astral theme according to the day and hour of birth (astrology)
* A person’s numbers (numerology)
* The hand’s lines, shapes, and features (palmistry)
* Handwriting (graphology)
* Someone’s gaze
* Eyes’ color<ref>Larsson M, Pedersen NL, Stattin H. Associations between iris characteristics and personality in adulthood. Biol Psychol. 2007 May;75(2):165-75. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.01.007. Epub 2007 Feb 1. PMID: 17343974.</ref>
* Physiological characteristics such as DNA, blood type (hematopsychology), or fingerprints
* The perception sensitivity in terms of taste, smell, sight, hearing, or touch
* The pleasant or repulsive smell<ref>There is this story about young adult Steve Jobs who had a repulsive smell, that went on for many years; An information obtained from people who worked with him. There are many similar other stories. Such cases are usually handled by managers, or if not HR.</ref>
* Food and body hygiene (dental hygiene analysis is still practiced in some Asian and African countries)
* How one shakes hands, has sweaty hands, opens or closes the door, sits, stands up, etc.

The list of characteristics is not complete, but all of the above have been seen in organizations. Some characteristics are kept private or only partly acknowledged. Attitudes toward oneself and others, along with development strategies, are influenced by the nature and strength of these characteristics and how much people believe in them.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]

Individual Characteristics

2026-08-12T16:44:03Z

Flc: /* The Big Seven */

=Introduction=
[[File:Characteristics.png|right|220px]]
This article presents the individual characteristics that underpin everyone's assessments, decision-making, relationship-building, and performance characterization. Characteristics are major factors differentiating individuals. Many characteristics are naturally used in forming judgments, but only a few become significant when considering people’s roles and their management in organizations.

The above aspects are discussed, as well as how the characteristics can be classified to improve performance. Individual characteristics are not only about individuals but also shape expectations for the positions people occupy, how decisions will be made, and how communication will occur. Once a position is occupied, individual characteristics define a model for that position.

=Characteristics' Assessment=
The quality of characteristics is closely linked to the techniques used to assess them. At a minimum, private techniques are the most basic and widespread methods employed by anyone. If not private, techniques may include those used informatively by organizations, esoteric techniques, and other approaches, such as semi-formal, formal, and statistical techniques<ref>The techniques are [[Assessment_Techniques | analyzed in this other article here]].</ref>.

The survey technique that uses a questionnaire and statistical analysis helps achieve a more effective and objective measurement of certain characteristics. It is considered objective because the results are obtained without relying on someone else’s judgment. The interpretation or analysis may involve judgment, but not the measurement itself. Most characteristics are straightforward and can be easily assessed through private techniques. However, other characteristics like abilities and social behavior are more complex and harder to define. They benefit from a standardized process, the use of metrics, and the application of statistics, similar to how any other tool enhances human capabilities.

=The Big Seven=
[[File:Patchwork_Small.png|right|220px]]
Individual characteristics are numerous, although some may be regrouped; only a few are generally considered for performance. As noted above, some are easy to define and assess, while others are less so, even though they are critical. The seven characteristics shown here are commonly used in organizations. They help focus attention when assessing someone for a job, especially when several assessors are involved. Social behavior at the center is the most obvious, visible, and present; however, harder to assess objectively. This characteristic has been at the center of GRI's research project phase 1, which aimed to improve and define performance when social behavior measures were used by leaders and managers. The seven characteristics are as follows, with brief definitions. They are then detailed one by one before other characteristics are discussed.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
!Characteristic !! Brief Description
|-
| Social Behavior || The way people act, adapt, and perform from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint, and function in their specific state of flow.
|-
| Intelligence || The general mental ability that accounts for a person’s intellectual agility, memory capacity, and verbal fluency.
|-
| Values || The beliefs and ideas people have and value the most.
|-
| Abilities || The specific mental and physical aptitudes to perform, which may partially be innate.
|-
| Interests || The preference, attraction, and excitement of working in a job, to learn and execute tasks.
|-
| Skills || The competences, technical or social, that are related to an occupation.
|-
| Experience || The skills that are gained from executing tasks or in jobs over time.
|}

==Social Behavior==
[[File:Patchwork_Behavior.png|right|160px]]
Social behavior is how people interact and adapt from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoints. This component of personality tells about how people function, interact, communicate, make decisions, manage, lead, learn, and more.

Social behavior is the characteristic that we assess the most spontaneously and naturally with our private techniques, but the hardest to get right and with nuances. As for measuring temperature, we may have a good intuition and sense of it, but getting to know the exact room temperature is hard. It requires having an indication of what “exact” and “right” mean, an objective measure with a reference point, and a scale.

Personality is a larger concept than social behavior, sometimes equated to behavior, but also including psychiatric and clinical behaviors. Or personality can include cognitive processes like intelligence that are not part of “social behavior” as we define it here. “Social behavior” includes a large scope of behaviors normally observed in people at work and in society, even if those behaviors are sometimes intense or extreme.

The understanding of social behavior can be approximated by some traits or types. Adaptive profiles from a factor-based approach, as we do at GRI, account for nuances, relative stability, and adaptation that other methods can’t. With appropriate metrics, the adaptive profile additionally informs about social behavior’s intensity, the efforts to adapt, motivation, and engagement in the job.

Social behavior is about achieving results and performing like actors on stage by playing a role. Employees and everyone else do the same, like actors, to meet the expectations in their jobs, as they see them. Mindset can also refer to social behavior, as long as it is clear that it relates to how people specifically think and feel about how they and others behave.
Social behavior is omnipresent in our activities. We experience, live them, and have observed them since we were born. They are facing us constantly. When we discuss people, that’s what we talk about. We all have our own sense of how to assess social behavior with our own vocabulary, its nuances, and what we refer to as our private techniques.

==Intelligence==
[[File:Patchwork_Intelligence.png|right|160px]]
Intelligence is a multifaceted concept, encompassing various theoretical frameworks and assessment techniques. It is commonly understood as involving cognitive, verbal and memory capabilities. General Mental Ability (GMA) or intelligence is often measured through standardized tests.

The assessment of intelligence has significantly advanced since the early 1900s with the development of surveys and more sophisticated statistical methods. Early pioneers like Binet and Simon developed scales that introduced the concept of mental age, which later evolved into the use of standard IQ scores that measure specific abilities such as verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, non-verbal reasoning, and short-term memory. Other influential theories include Spearman's g-factor, which proposes a general intelligence factor alongside specific abilities, and Thurstone's identification of primary mental abilities. Subsequent research by various scholars further expanded the understanding of intelligence. Wechsler's scales, for example, distinguish between verbal, performance, and total IQs, moving beyond the earlier concept of mental age.

Hierarchical models have also emerged, combining different theoretical views to provide a broader understanding of intelligence. These models usually place a general intelligence factor at the top, with more specific factors and core abilities below. Besides traditional cognitive intelligence, the idea of emotional intelligence (EQ) has become more important, highlighting a person's social skills, empathy, and self-awareness. Additionally, Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences proposes that individuals have a wide variety of unique intelligences, challenging the idea of a single, universal measure of intelligence. In professional environments, proxy measures like educational achievements are often used to assess intelligence.

We can use our intellect to exert control over our social behavior, and we adapt thanks to it. But our ability to change our behavior in this way is limited. Although IQ is important in many jobs, and it is important to assess intelligence, how we behave and are motivated is distinct and uncorrelated to our IQ. Not only is this clear from research studies, but it is also demonstrated by the adaptive profiles. There is no single profile that is the smartest; anyone can be smart in their own way.

==Values==
[[File:Patchwork_Values.png|right|160px]]
Values are personal beliefs and principles that individuals consider important, shaping their attitudes, behaviors, and decisions across various areas of life, including work, society, religion, and politics. They act as an internal compass, establishing standards for what is viewed as appropriate and desirable.

The concept of value can be likened to interest, although values are generally considered more fundamental and widespread. When deeply rooted, values reflect strong preferences for certain activities and behaviors. In educational settings, values have been connected to academic choices and extracurricular involvement. While they are helpful for emphasizing desired behaviors, measuring values can be difficult because of their subjective and adaptable nature. For example, assigning "moral" values to someone in a particular context suggests their actions are consistent with a broad range of norms within that setting, often validated by selected examples from that individual.

Values, preferences, interests, and social behavior are interconnected. A person's value system offers guidelines for evaluating their own actions and those of others, shaping their attitudes and choices. This complex relationship between concepts is clarified by an individual's adaptive profile, which shows varying levels of behavior intensity and adaptation.

Personal values are also linked to cultural values and societal norms, with corporate values playing a crucial role in establishing expectations and shared understandings within organizations, particularly concerning social behaviors.

The value concept is [[Values | further developed in this article here.]]

==Abilities==
[[File:Patchwork_Abilities.png|right|160px]]
In psychology, the concept of abilities is closely related to that of intelligence. Abilities, as for instance in Thurstone's theory, include verbal comprehension and memory. Mental abilities and cognitive functions like attention and language can be measured by assessment techniques.

In common language, abilities designate the manual or intellectual aptitudes to perform, which often imply inherent gifts or education. For example, a person might have a natural ability for an art, sports, or a language. With that definition, abilities tend to remain stable throughout life and influence how people process information and execute tasks. Abilities differ from skills in that skills are also developed through learning and practice.
Abilities are more specific to certain roles, such as high verbal ability, which is valuable for writing, while spatial ability is important for an engineer working in computer-aided design, or being 6-feet tall is valuable for performing in basketball and volleyball.

==Interests==
[[File:Patchwork_Interests.png|right|160px]]
Interests in executing some tasks and performing a job are the expression of a preference that excites attention and curiosity. In sports, for example, we speak of an interest in playing football or lacrosse. A person may be interested in working in one company or another, on an activity, with certain people, a team, and a manager, or under certain conditions. What’s more, interests grow over time. What a person is interested in builds through contact with others in real situations within organizations, through internships and apprenticeships, or by occupying and executing a job.

Interests can be of different natures, including social, financial, operational, and ethical. The way an organization balances and responds to these interests is critical for its success. Interest, engagement, and motivation work in concert for a person to perform in a job, overcome challenges, and deliver results efficiently. Interests—and lack of interest—is also informed by an adaptive profile from a behavioral standpoint, and the related emotions to perform in a job.

==Skills==
[[File:Patchwork_Skills.png|right|160px]]
Skills refer to the dexterity, speed, precision, and efficiency with which actions or cognition are performed. A skilled person is someone who can perform quickly and well. Skills can be manual and behavioral (overt behavior), or intellectual (covert behavior). We can evidence skills, for instance, in software coding, consulting, mechanical engineering, and accounting as well as in plumbing, welding, painting, or gardening. A skill is flexible and can be taught, practiced, and improved over time.

A skill is measurable and can be demonstrated through qualifications, certifications, and performance assessments. The concept of skills is distinct from that of intelligence or abilities in that it implies that it is acquired through deliberate practice, education, and experience. It similarly applies to managerial and social skills that can be learned and acquired with appropriate context, tools, and learning process.

==Experience==
[[File:Patchwork_Experience.png|right|160px]]
Unlike skills and behaviors learned in simulated or classroom settings, those gained through experience result from direct, concrete, and practical contact with facts or events. The reality, intensity, and diversity of those contacts give the skills and behaviors some nuances and meanings rooted in those situations. Being learned in the field, skills and behaviors derived from experience tend to be less general and more closely tied to specific contexts than those acquired more abstractly and deductively off the field.

Experience helps build an intuitive and nuanced appreciation of skills that allow one to act with ease, confidence, and speed. Experience can create agility, both physical and intellectual. Inexperience, on the other hand, may cause errors or delay execution, yet at the same time, it can also bring fresh insights and perspectives. A number of years of experience, however, cannot tell how skills were learned, expressed, or shared. Looking at experience, thus, always needs to be informed by how it builds, something that social behavior, as it is informed by an adaptive profile, can tell.

Experience is particularly important with managerial and social skills, often learned informally, through trial and error, by working with real people and situations. This kind of learning usually takes time. Experience is also essential for all expert manual or intellectual work that demands dexterity and precision. When learning social behavior with GRI’s adaptive profiles, creating meaning on symbols through real, practical, social experience is key, as it has been emphasized in the symbolic interactionism theory. Experience is also central to the concept of enactment, which designates the emergence of knowledge through the presence of individuals in the field.

=More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_More.png|right|220px]]
The characteristics used in organizations are not limited to these seven. Depending on the industry, company, country, and local influences, other concepts are applied that, in some way, overlap with the seven. A brief definition is provided below, including which other concepts they most closely compare to.

===Personality===
Personality is a broad concept that includes social behavior, intelligence, abilities, etc., and clinical behavior that is assessed by therapists and psychiatrists. The history of personality assessment started from psychiatry and therapy, and later expanded to large-scale recruitments. For this reason and for these applications, personality has been measured with traits. Social behavior, however, accounts for people’s behavior in the “normal” range, which does not include clinical behaviors.<ref>A brief history and prospects of personality assessment is[[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect | discussed in this article here.]]</ref>

===Character===
Like personality, character is a broad concept. It combines mental and ethical traits, such as honesty, courage, and integrity. Although character, values, and personality are three distinct concepts, they are interconnected. Personality is centered on how people act, values on beliefs, including moral ones, and character on mental and ethical qualities. All tend to explain how the others do. Social behavior overlaps with the three on how someone behaves, expresses themselves, and also thinks, and feels, including about their values and ethics.

===Competences===
The competence concept is a generic concept that combines skills, abilities, experiences, and more. Competency models focus on the management of knowledge and other characteristics acquired during training, most often, especially in large organizations, with HRMS (Human Resources Management System), Talent Management platforms, or Learning and development (L&D) platforms. Competency models are used by management and Human Resources to define, train, and use the competencies in recruitment, development, and succession planning. However, competency models underplay the emotions involved in developing behaviors and soft skills and often end up with lists of behavioral attributes that are conflicting. Competency management innately applies to technical rather than social skills.

===Attitudes===
Attitudes are considered to be antecedent to behaviors and of a cognitive, emotional, or sentimental nature or as a disposition to act. They may vary depending on the context or mood. Behaviors could be anticipated from the knowledge of someone’s attitudes. In everyday language, attitudes and behaviors are often used interchangeably. An attitude cannot be apprehended directly. Based on values and beliefs, attitudes are affected by the forces of the situation before being verbal or non-verbal behaviors and expressed. People most often act in accordance with their attitudes and intentions, which are themselves influenced by their values and motivation. Attitudes can be anticipated from affective, cognitive, and behavioral data as it is measured in the adaptive profile.

===Aptitudes===
An aptitude is the potential to perform certain activities, whether physical or mental, developed or undeveloped, in a particular domain. In psychology, the concept is close to that of abilities when viewed as inborn, or skills that can be developed by learning, or a combination of the two. In everyday language, aptitudes refer to the possibility of talents or skills for a person to occupy a position. Aptitude refers to a specific area: verbal, spatial, mechanical, business, management, critical thinking, logical reasoning, etc., that can be measured. Students get screened for aptitude through the SAT, GRE, GATE tests, or other certifications.

===Knowledge===
Knowledge is the information memorized by a person and the ability to use it when dealing with a specific topic. Knowledge often involves the possession of information learned through experience. We speak of knowledge of a foreign language, in computer science, biology, mechanics, management, culture, or any other general or specific field.

The storage and retrieval mechanisms make an unequivocal parallel with a computer’s functioning. A person’s knowledge must be distinguished from doing and acting on it, or the speed of processing information, which fall into the categories of social behavior and intelligence.

===Training===
By training, we mean classes, masterclasses, studies, courses, or programs attended by someone, which usually result in receiving a diploma or certificate. Training makes it possible to acquire knowledge and skills in a formal way through reading, role play, case studies, homework, presentations, pitches, etc., on a particular topic. A training predisposes a person to then express skills in a real context, adapting those skills and continuing to develop them in the field.

Compared to learning by experience, learning by training is more general, less specific to an environment, but is also more adaptable. It is less nuanced and trustworthy for not having yet been confronted with practical reality and for being only a "laboratory" repertoire.

===Culture & language===
The culture specifies the context in which a person’s skills, behaviors, and abilities were acquired: country, region, state, time, and other factors that condition the habits, language, food, norms, and protocols. Culture forms attitudes, values, personality, and social habits.

===Physical and health===
Physical and health characteristics are of particular importance in positions that require them, as for instance for delivery, being an athlete, acting a role on stage, being a fashion models who must have certain aesthetic or physiognomic dispositions.

===Talent===
Talent is a synonym for aptitude, natural abilities, and skills in a specific domain that can be work-related or not, extending to sports, music, and art in general. Some personality assessments use the word “talent” and a multiple typology approach to assist personal development and coaching, although they focus only on the social behavior component. By that definition, talent is part of someone's character, which needs to be understood and valued.

=Even More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_Even_More.png|right|220px]]
There are many additional characteristics beyond those listed above. Some may be surprising, but all have been observed at GRI over the years, including even esoteric ones, within an organizational context. Some characteristics can easily be obtained by social media or a resumé; Others by interview. Some are ethically and legally questionable. All characteristics can be related to their measurement techniques<ref>The assessment techniques[[ Assessment_Techniques | are discussed in this article here]]</ref>. Any distinctive characteristic on which an appreciation or judgment is potentially based must be considered.

The reality is that everyone bases their judgment on characteristics that are not explicitly articulated, such as when feeling embarrassment, doubt, or, conversely, confidence and validation, without being able to label the origin of those emotions. Professional recruiters, HR experts, and leaders are not exempt. Competence models and HRIS systems do not store them in files. However, judgment in recruiting, communicating, managing, and organizing is based on some of those characteristics, as it is for everyone.

Studies on leadership highlight characteristics such as appearance or clothing <ref>Bass B. M. (1990). </ref>. Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: theory, research, and managerial application. New York: Free Press. First published in 1974.</ref>. Gesture is emphasized in non-verbal communication<ref>Watzlavick P., Beavin H., Jackson, D. (1972). Une logique de la communication. Paris, Le Seuil.</ref>. Guittet regroups the characteristics of paralanguage into four categories<ref>Guittet, A. (1986). L’entretien. Paris, Armand Colin.</ref>:
* Posture: tone, gestures, bodily contact (handshakes, affectionate gestures, etc.), hand movements, crossing of legs, way of standing at the table, walking or standing in public.
* Body image: clothing choices that go along with fashion trends or not, giving a sign of belonging to a social group.
* Face and mimicry: micro verbal expressions, signs of attention, impatience, astonishment, support, or rejection. Eye movements, gaze fixed, fleeing, or determined, etc.<ref>Brandler, R., Grinder, J. (1984) Les secrets de la communication. Editions Reuille.</ref>
* Territory: the space that exists between individuals<ref>Hall, E. T. (1954). The silent language. New York, Doubleday.</ref>. It also concerns movements, agile, fast, and heavy.

Whether we want it or not, other characteristics get into our evaluations and judgments. It’s most often a matter of being aware of them and being educated to minimize or eliminate bias from them. The list continues:
* Age, height, weight, gender, skin color, and cultural and social origin
* Family and business connections
* Place of residence
* Association, political group, religious group, work team, committee, and more generally, the groups to which one belongs
* Corpulence (morphopsychology): endomorph, mesomorph, or ectomorph<ref> Kretschmer, E. (1936). Physique and Character. New York: Harcourt.</ref>
* The shape of the skull (phrenology) or the shape of the face
* Oral expression. The way of expressing oneself in public, in private. The intonations, pitch, or range of the voice. Eloquence
* The written expression. Fluency and writing style
* The astral theme according to the day and hour of birth (astrology)
* A person’s numbers (numerology)
* The hand’s lines, shapes, and features (palmistry)
* Handwriting (graphology)
* Someone’s gaze
* Eyes’ color<ref>Larsson M, Pedersen NL, Stattin H. Associations between iris characteristics and personality in adulthood. Biol Psychol. 2007 May;75(2):165-75. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.01.007. Epub 2007 Feb 1. PMID: 17343974.</ref>
* Physiological characteristics such as DNA, blood type (hematopsychology), or fingerprints
* The perception sensitivity in terms of taste, smell, sight, hearing, or touch
* The pleasant or repulsive smell<ref>There is this story about young adult Steve Jobs who had a repulsive smell, that went on for many years; An information obtained from people who worked with him. There are many similar other stories. Such cases are usually handled by managers, or if not HR.</ref>
* Food and body hygiene (dental hygiene analysis is still practiced in some Asian and African countries)
* How one shakes hands, has sweaty hands, opens or closes the door, sits, stands up, etc.

The list of characteristics is not complete, but all of the above have been seen in organizations. Some characteristics are kept private or only partly acknowledged. Attitudes toward oneself and others, along with development strategies, are influenced by the nature and strength of these characteristics and how much people believe in them.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]

Operationalizing Performance

2026-08-12T03:19:31Z

Flc: /* Making Sense of Performance */

=Introduction=
The measures from the adaptive profile possess several characteristics that are central for understanding, implementing, and managing individual and organizational performance. This note lists and comments on these characteristics.

=Making Sense of Performance=
The adaptive profiles inform about how people can best perform in their jobs and how they will likely be more efficient and productive. Thanks to the visual representations, the analysis is immediate and quantifiable. The inverted shape of the adaptive profiles—its symmetry across the average—also instantly tells about the behaviors that will create the opposite effect, that is, inefficiency and lack of productivity.

When taken at a group level, the information clearly shows how the group functions and the conditions for its efficiency. By aggregating individual results at a group level, it is possible to get a quantified indication of how diverse people are within the group, and how the group may depart from some expected behaviors.

=Adaptive Profiles Characteristicss=
The adaptive profiles have eight key characteristics which are the following:
* '''Quality of the measures'''—what's measured—on how people perform, function, and act, which is at the crossroads of their preferences, interests, mindset, how they think, value, and feel about how they behave, their beliefs about who they are, and how they interact in their environment.
* '''Quality of the result'''—the adaptive profile—that allows a concentration of significant meaning and continued learning about people and their organization.
* '''Adaptive nature''' of the measures as revealed in the Role profile, for understanding people in context, the energy it takes to adapt, and people's engagement.
* '''Behavioral aspect''' of the measures, and their ability to be observed, learned, shared, and validated.
* '''Accuracy''' of the measures, including their general validity, reliability over time, and predictability.
* '''Utility''' of the measures in a broad range of applications for recruitment, management, leadership, and organisational development.
* '''Universality''' of the measures. The measures are independent of a person's age, gender, cultural origin, education, skin color, religion, and political affiliation.
* '''Work-relatedness''' of the measures. The measures apply to any position in organizations, regardless of the industry, country, or hierarchy level.

=Making Sense of Other Concepts=
By nature, the concepts and adjectives we use to describe people and their behaviors have different meanings. A limited number of factors—in the case of GRI, four—allow us to analyze these concepts and bring accuracy regarding their expression.

The factors were originally evidenced by analyzing a large number of adjectives used to describe behaviors. With these factors and appropriate measurement, we can describe how other concepts are being expressed, such as the way of being creative, delegating, communicating, directing, managing, leading, mentoring, teaching, learning, solving complex problems, etc.

=Understanding Adaptation=
By understanding the energy it takes to adapt and the implications on someone's engagement and productivity, the measures invite asking new questions about how people can better fit and perform in their jobs. The adaptive profiles help people adjust their behaviors within reasonable limits. They inform about how the adaptation will happen and the eventual development and support needed.

When analyzing a person's development with the adaptive profiles over time, it becomes evident that the Natural profile doesn't change much, but the Role profile may. Statistics on a sample of 1,200 individuals who answered the GRI survey several times during a period of up to 10 years confirm this observation. The more the Role profile is different from the Natural profile, the more adaptation the person perceives.

=Fit with Job Expectations=
Whether a person is suitable for a job also depends on whether their adaptive profile aligns with it, which is not just about intelligence, skills, or experience. Instead, it’s about how those other characteristics develop and adapt, as the adaptive profile can reveal. The mismatches seen between the Natural and Role profiles or between the Natural and Effective profiles and the position’s profile<ref>[[Adaptive Profile|See some explanations about the adaptive profiles here.]]</ref> are likely to lead to practical adjustments at the individual level or in the job.

=Notes=

[[Category:Notes]]
[[Category:Performance]]
[[Category:General Framework]]

Use of Tools and Concepts

2026-08-11T23:02:35Z

Flc: /* Introduction */

=Introduction=
[[File:GRI TPU.png|right|250px]]
The tools and concepts that they measure serve various purposes depending on what the concept stands for, how it is measured, and how both are learned and used. As we demonstrate at GRI, how a measure is presented has significant implications for the uses it supports.<ref>The science of signs, or semiotics, is presented in this article [[Language_and_Signs | here, for how signs produced by assessment techniques show, what they indicate, and the rules, inferences, and norms built from them.]]</ref> As for other types of measures, such as temperature, the scale used, and how the results are presented determine what will be done with them. If an instrument indicates room temperature on a continuous scale rather than only whether the room is hot or cold, one may eventually dress accordingly, rather than having only an approximate idea of what to do.

Our research identified six primary practical uses of the measures in “Organizational Development,” “Leadership,” “Coaching,” “Recruitment,” “Clinical,” and for their “Medium Effect,” and also three more theoretical and abstract uses that appear across the six practical areas: “Self and Social Awareness,” “Learning,” and “Language and Signs.”

Not all techniques qualify for the uses mentioned above. For instance, for a technique to be applicable at the organizational level, it must deliver long-term practical and strategic impact. Some techniques measure a specific trait, such as "honesty," for a single purpose in recruitment. In any case, many aspects are involved in determining what can be done with an assessment technique, what it measures, and who uses it. These aspects are reviewed hereafter.

=Antecedents of Use=
What are the causal factors underlying the use of tools or assessment techniques, and the concepts they measure? GRI’s general framework helps identify four categories:
* Tool or assessment technique's qualities
* User's role and interests
* Organization’s culture and the social environment
* Publisher business model and consultant behind the tool and concept.

The assessment's quality and the publisher's business model are essential factors that influence its use beforehand. No measure is possible without the technique itself, whatever it is. Assessment techniques have different qualities that either restrict or facilitate their use. The publisher's and consultant's business models affect the quality, autonomy, and resources available for implementation.

Not everyone is receptive to a new tool and concept. Each person and organization has their own beliefs about human nature, including how people and their organizations function and why. These beliefs are deeply anchored in one's experience. They may evolve when faced with practical challenges or when prompted by the company, for instance, as part of a leadership development program. GRI adaptive profiles and organizational profiles also indicate how a new technique and concepts can be deployed: at different speeds, with more or less structure and processes, and with varying levels of communication and consensus. People and their environment grow as the tools and concepts progress within the organization.

Individuals have been exposed to one or more techniques and consultants who use them, such as for coaching, team building, recruitment, or search. With these first experiences also came the individual's appreciation of the technique’s potential and limitations. This first experience serves as a benchmark for what other techniques could do next. If not yet exposed to an assessment technique, their parallel technique—private, common, esoteric, or a combination of the three — is their benchmark.

=Use for Organizational Development=
[[File:PU Organization.png|right|250px]]
Among the various uses of assessment techniques, those at an organizational level appear to be the most significant and impactful. New information for analyzing teams, departments, companies, and their management during mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations that is accurate, helps make important people decisions that typically need to happen fast, and will have important repercussions on their future development, engagement, and performance.

Envisioning jobs to be filled more accurately at all levels of a company, including for executives and directors, is strategic for the organization's needs and its functioning. The characteristics of the individuals who will be recruited and managed for those jobs must be consistent and align with the vision and strategic intent. This naturally happens with characteristics such as experience or diplomas. It happens similarly with other characteristics that can help in leveraging performance.

In behavioral terms, for comparisons with individuals’ adaptive profiles, we refer, at GRI, to those characteristics at a job level as a PBI (Position Behavior Indicator), or at a team or company level as a TBI (Team Behavior Indicator). The use of those indicators has proven valuable for guiding recruitment and organizational development by executives and managers.

As research in Agent-Based Models (ABMs) shows<ref>Macy M. W., Willer R. (2002). From Factors to Actors: Computational Sociology and Agent-Based Modeling. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 143-166. Axtell, Robert L., and J. Doyne Farmer. 2025. "Agent-Based Modeling in Economics and Finance: Past, Present, and Future." Journal of Economic Literature 63 (1): 197–287. DOI: 10.1257/jel.20221319</ref>, a better understanding of individual variables is necessary to analyze group phenomena and find effective, creative solutions. Given the importance of the relationships between macro and micro phenomena<ref>Alexander J. C., Giesen B., Münch R., Smelser N. (1987). The Micro-macro link. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.</ref> and the capacity of assessment techniques to provide more objective quality information at these two levels, one can assume that their use for organizational development can have a strong, positive impact on performance.

=Use for Leadership and Management=
[[File:PU Leadership.png|right|250px]]
The following uses of the assessment technique fall into this category: employee motivation and engagement, inspiring a shared vision, day-to-day communication, people management, goal setting, feedback, periodic review, employee onboarding, management of meetings, and team members’ development<ref>The items mentioned are only examples; the list continues. It was inspired both deductively, by literature in leadership, and inductively, by observation from the exploration field.</ref>Although some aspects may be handled by HR and team members, the responsibility of their execution falls to the leader. For leaders of leaders, leadership applies, to a minimum, to close team members. The ability to deal with conflicts and manage organizational change is an important part of this leadership category.

The analysis of the effects of assessment techniques clearly distinguishes their uses in leadership from those traditionally delegated to human resources, organizational development specialists, or coaches. The effects on leaders when using the assessment information on their own, and the effects on the organization, differentiate this category from those of recruitment, coaching, and organizational development.

Research by Kouzes and Posner on leadership clearly demonstrates the need for people and social skills in a leadership role, regardless of their style. A leader first needs social awareness and to find their strength before going out to take on some challenges; Among other things, they need to inspire a shared vision, enable others to act, and encourage the heart
<ref>Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2023). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.</ref>, which all call for people skills that quality assessment techniques assist with.

The importance of a leader’s personal characteristics and style: democratic, autocratic, participative, charismatic, etc., that of the people they lead, and the characteristics of the environment in which they operate have been covered by numerous studies on leadership and management<ref>See for instance: Bass B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: theory, research, and managerial application. New York: Free Press.</ref>. How relevant those characteristics are depends on the situation<ref>Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., Jhonson, D. E. (1996). Management of organizational behavior. Utilizing human resources. Prentice Hall. 6th Edition. First published in 1969.</ref> and thus the capacity to analyze the fit between the two, and for a leader to know how to adapt<ref>Vroom, V. H., Jago A. G. (2007). The Role of the Situation in Leadership. American Psychologist. Vol. 62, No. 1, p. 17-24.</ref>. More precise information from assessment techniques offers new insights and augments a leader's capacity to build their team members' leadership, and, in return, helps team members' leadership build that of their leader<ref>Ibid, Bass B. M. (1990).</ref>.

Other research provides evidence that a leader’s most complicated challenges are adaptive challenges that require people to adapt their behavior and change their values, beliefs, priorities, and loyalties<ref>Heifetz, R. A., Linsky, M., & Grashow, A. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard Business Review Press.</ref>. Those, again, should benefit from more objective and accurate information on people’s development. All the above elements suggest that, with appropriate characteristics, the link between the use of an assessment technique on leadership is fundamental and has a positive effect on performance.

=Use for Recruitment=
[[File:PU Recruitment.png|right|250px]]
“Recruitment” includes here the processes of selection, sourcing, search, interview, skills assessment, management of high potentials, succession planning, career development, promotion<ref>As for leadership, the list for recruitment is not limited to those items. These are just examples. The list continues.</ref>. In large organizations, these aspects are managed by human resources departments. They are shared with leadership and managers who work closely with them. In smaller organizations, management takes a more active role, especially when the HR department focuses only on payroll and compliance. Unlike leadership, these aspects can all be outsourced and are increasingly supplemented by AI agents.

Assessment techniques have been used for mass recruitment since the early 20th century, for executive search since the 1980s, and similarly for promotions in large organizations. The use of mass recruitment has been the most studied in research, focusing on compliance with EEOC and ADA requirements, work-relatedness, and minimum reliability and validity. When these conditions are met, the assessment technique adds incremental value to other success factors, helping to improve individual and organizational performance.

Additionally, when interviewing and making selection decisions, the interviewer can combine the information from the assessment technique with other subjective insights that need to be used immediately and are outside the scope of HR processes and AI automation.

As observed at GRI, the results of the assessment technique are used during the recruitment stage to quickly help tailor the job to the candidate or, conversely, to help adapt the candidate to the job. The quality of the information, its relevance to the job, and the candidate’s behavioral adaptability are all crucial elements for making this decision.

=Use for Coaching=
[[File:PU Coaching.png|right|250px]]
Coaching has been on the rise since the late 1990s and has used assessment techniques early on, the most notorious one being the Myers-Briggs Typology Indicator or MBTI. Although the first phase of our research didn’t include this category in the early 2000s, the evident use of assessment techniques in coaching and mentoring at all levels of an organization made them a natural candidate for the current revised framework.

Assessment techniques used by coaches are numerous<ref>Möeller, H., and Kotte, S. (2022). “Assessment in coaching” in International handbook of evidence-based coaching: theory, research and practice. eds. S. Greif, H. Möller, W. Scholl, J. Passmore, and F. Müller (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 55–64. Passmore, J. (Ed.). (2012). Psychometrics in coaching: Using psychological and psychometric tools for development (2nd ed.). Kogan Page.</ref>, more recent than those in recruitment, but focused on individual personal development, team building, and other specific interventions such as conflict resolution, which are a natural continuation of a coaching service. Coaching is typically delivered remotely. It follows the standards of positive psychology and is solution-focused<ref>Sutton, J. (2020) Coaching styles explained: 4 different approaches. Psychology.com. https://positivepsychology.com/coaching-styles/</ref>. Techniques generally used by coaches include 360-degree feedback and personality assessments based on typologies (e.g., Extroversion or Introversion), which differ from trait assessments used in recruitment. GRI’s factor approach is a distinct third category we’ve also seen coaches use successfully to develop self-efficacy.

Coaching is rarely involved in recruitment, which may, however, be at the root of some of the challenges coaches face. It remains distinct from leadership development, as it focuses on personal development at work and in life rather than on the organization being led or its outcomes. Mentoring, which, rather than guiding leaders, provides them with experience, advice, and wisdom<ref> Passmore, J., & Tee, D. (2021). Coaching researched: A coaching psychology reader. John Wiley & Sons.</ref>, may use techniques, but more rarely so.

The primary impact of coaching and mentoring, as far as the use of assessment techniques is concerned, is the enhancement of self-efficacy, with self- and social awareness occurring concomitantly. Studies have consistently evidenced moderately positive effects on individual-level outcomes and personal efficacy.<ref>Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., and van Vianen, A. E. (2014). Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context. J. Posit. Psychol. 9, 1–18. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2013.837499 Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Bowers, C., Carlson, M., Doherty, P., Evans, S., & Hall, G. (2023). Workplace coaching: A meta-analysis and recommendations for advancing the science of coaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1204166. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1204166</ref>. The repercussions of increased self-efficacy may subsequently impact an organization’s performance.

=Use in Clinical Settings=
[[File:PU Clinical.png|right|250px]]
Behavioral, mental health, occupational health, work-related stress, stress management, anxiety, depression, emotional exhaustion, burnout, physical health, and well-being services provided to employees, commonly referred to as the Employee Assistance Programs (EAP), are increasingly a standard part of corporate offerings to employees. Assessment techniques were devised and used for clinical practice in the late 1890s. They have been greatly refined over the years and continue to be used by clinicians to diagnose and provide therapy and counselling.

Use of health services has significantly increased in companies since the pandemic, with new digital tools such as mobile phones, video conferencing platforms, and AI agents. These services may sometimes include development and coaching on various topics, but because they focus on clinical therapy and counseling, they remain different from coaching. These services have consistently proven to be effective in helping to treat mental health issues, thereby improving work productivity<ref>Lyra (2025). State of Workforce Mental Health Report. A report from Mental Health Innovation Summit 2025. https://www.lyrahealth.com/resources/report/2025-state-of-workforce-mental-health-report/ Kuang, T., Guo, C., Ren, M., Fu, L., Li, C., Ma, S., & Li, R. (2025). The effectiveness of e-mental health interventions on stress, anxiety, and depression symptoms in healthcare professionals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health, 25(1), 1083. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02565-6</ref>, and reducing a major inefficiency and expense in the modern economy.<ref>World Health Organization. (2024, September 2). Mental health at work. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-at-work</ref>.

We’ve observed GRI psychiatrists and clinicians progressively using a range of assessment techniques beyond traditional ones, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) or the Enneagram. Those assessments have provided them with insights into their patients that were not available through traditional techniques and have been useful for diagnosing individual challenges, work-related issues, and counseling solutions.

More nuanced information from assessment techniques, whether provided and used within or outside the organization by EAPs, should assist in improving mental health, removing systemic factors originating from the workplace, enhancing a person’s self-awareness, efficacy, and consequently the organization’s performance.

=Use for Medium Effect=
[[File:PU Medium.png|right|250px]]
Assessment techniques literally measure any concept one may want to assess. They provide results, which, regardless of their quality, may impress many. They give the impression of carrying some truth, as numbers and statistics by the publisher show, regardless of the quality of those statistics. Does one like to know the kind of hero or genius they are? An application will provide the answer in no time. With AI, one can now quickly devise, test, and deploy any new technique.

GRI general framework includes three parallel assessment techniques: 1) Personal techniques, those of everyone, that are subjective and that statistics can never check; 2) Common techniques that companies may refer to for analyzing culture fit, and 3) Esoteric techniques that are as old as the beginning of time. Those assessments are all commonly used in organizations and compete with other assessment techniques.

Assessment techniques continue to attract curiosity. Participants often ask: What might this other technique reveal about me? They remain popular in magazines, including astrology, although the Internet has helped bring the experience online with more interactivity, color, and faster results. They serve as a medium to entertain discussions, regardless of the technique's validity, reliability, or seriousness. In a large group presentation, answering an assessment technique helps jump-start conversations and increase participants' interest.

Although the medium effect can be easily observed, its connection to performance may be indirect, occurring alongside other uses. However, it is distinct from them and should be considered separately.

=Use for Self and Social Awareness=
[[File:TU Awareness.png|right|250px]]
Assessment techniques are used in feedback sessions or reports to provide participants with useful information for their personal growth. The information helps them identify their strengths, communication style, decision-making, career development, and more.

Techniques vary greatly in how measures are taken, presented, and used. Their quality also differs. In any case, they act as indicators of self-awareness. Moreover, this information is shared with others to understand them more effectively and objectively. To different extents, this understanding links personal information to their role within the team and company. They help individuals feel positive about their own abilities and others' capacity to perform in unique ways. Discussions about knowledge of Self and Others are key in the social sciences. Philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology, and ethnology naturally have their say on the question. Self-awareness is at the heart of the personal development and self-discovery market, which reached $48 billion in 2024.

Information from assessment techniques can potentially guide future growth, identify adaptive challenges, and create conditions for improving engagement. They also offer ways to resolve issues, prevent them from recurring, and stimulate continuous improvement. Consequently, using assessment techniques for self and social awareness supports their implementation in a large scope of practical applications at both the individual and group levels, while increasing their impact on performance.

=Use in Learning=
[[File:PU Learning.png|right|250px]]
The process of learning assessment techniques varies between publishers. Online publishers require no training or certification from anyone. The responsibility for learning and accreditation lies with their clients. Publishers of assessments used in coaching require coaches to be certified; publishers of clinical assessments will only sell to accredited clinical psychologists.

Private techniques clearly require no training because they are skills we have been practicing since birth. Common techniques are learned effortlessly through onboarding and by adopting the company’s culture. For esoteric techniques, the market is full of books and opportunities for further learning. The learning, whether light or deep, serves as the foundation for using the assessment technique. The type, depth, and number of applications learned and used depend on the capabilities of the technique.

At GRI, we found that training is a crucial element for effectively using the adaptive profiles across their different applications, including leadership and organizational development. Unlike other models, the new assessment technique competes with leaders’ private techniques. For learning to occur, it needs to be relevant to their ongoing agenda, include real examples, foster interest in people, follow an impeccable process, and require a little time.

In many cases, one-on-one coaching and mentoring have replaced group leadership training. However, interactions among managers during training group (T-group) sessions have demonstrated their value in knowledge acquisition. These sessions have utilized simple assessment techniques based on typology, similar to those used in coaching today. Research on sensitivity training<ref>Ibid, Bass B. M. (1990)</ref> has consistently shown the positive effects of training courses for leaders. When properly developed, the assessment technique adds value to leadership training and becomes a fundamental element.

Learning skills with a new assessment technique develops over time through practice, much as it does with cooking, sports, or playing a new musical instrument. The learning process is not instant. New skills are reinforced through application, sharing with others, and improvement in real-world situations. The ability to continuously build on one's assessment skills increases their effectiveness in practice and their impact on the organization’s performance.

=Use in Communication, Language and Signs=
[[File:PU Language.png|right|250px]]
Among the characteristics of assessment techniques, the language and signs created by the technique stand out as incommensurable, as the literature suggests<ref>Carnap, R. (1988). Meaning and Necessity. A study of Semantics and Modal Logic. The University of Chicago Press. 2nd Edition. First published in 1947. Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and Object. The MIT Press. Eco, U. (1979). A theory of Semiotics. Indiana University Press. Bloomington. Eco, U. (1988). Le Signe. Histoire et analyse d'un concept. Editions Labor. Translate from: Segno, 1973. Eco, U. (1995). The Search for the Perfect Language. Blackwell Publishers. Hacking, I. (2001). Probability and Inductive Logic. Cambridge University Press. Hacking, I. (2001). Why Language Matter To Philosophy? Cambridge University Press. 13th publication. First published in 1975. Korzybski, A. (1933). Science and Sanity. Institute of General Semantics. Hayakawa, S. I. (1939). Language in thought and action. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.</ref>. Mead’s work<ref>Mead G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society from the standpoint of a behaviorist. University of Chicago Press.</ref> emphasizes the importance of signs in building a person and their connection to the system. Additionally, the functional role of signs has been most thoroughly analyzed by Pierce’s work<ref>Peirce, C. S. (1935) Philosophical Writings of Peirce. Selection of papers between 1931 and 1935 by J. S. Buchler New York, Dover Publications.</ref>, which focused on the sign itself and its role in the inference process. From this perspective, the results of assessment techniques can be effective for quickly learning, memorizing, recalling, and creating new inferences and skills instantly.

The results from the assessment techniques have various qualities, including reports with short and long narratives, traits with numbers and scatter charts, typologies with words or letters like ESTJ for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, or D, I, S, C for the DISC system. With GRI, we chose profiles that can capture meaningful insights into people’s workplace behaviors, based on four factors. Four factors can account for up to 90% of people’s behavior.

Once learned, the symbolic language produced by the assessment technique is used to improve knowledge, communication, and decision-making for both the individual and their organization. The more concise, nuanced, precise, memorable, and shareable the results are, the more they reduce communication ambiguity, enhance decision-making, and boost other practical applications and their impact on performance.

=Notes=
[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Performance]]

Main Page

2026-08-11T23:00:12Z

Flc: /* General Framework */

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | GRI General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

Main Page

2026-08-11T22:59:18Z

Flc:

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

The Three Categories of Tools

2026-08-11T22:56:35Z

Flc: /* Adaptation */

=Introduction=
[[File:Three models.png|right|250px]]
For decades, researchers and the personality assessment industry have studied and refined various methods for measuring personality in organizations. These methods are used for hiring, personal development, coaching, and more, including in clinical settings. We at GRI have reviewed these methods by analyzing their effects and benefits on individual and organizational performance, how they were developed, and by studying their users: traditional users like human resources managers, recruiters, coaches, and clinicians, as well as managers and executives.

In social matters, unlike in technology, change happens slowly. As for assessment techniques, particularly with personality, as their history shows, understanding their true potential takes time<ref>See [[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect|here a brief history, and some perspectives about the progress of personality assessments.]]</ref>. This extended process may be due to a combination of factors: the abstract nature of the concepts being measured, the effort needed to learn these techniques, and the emotional attachment people develop toward them.

Assessment techniques can reveal their real capabilities through actual cases that genuinely matter. These cases usually come from organizations that care not only about performance in finance and production but also about how these outcomes are delivered from behavioral, cognitive, and emotional perspectives.

Using both qualitative and quantitative methods has helped us gain a detailed understanding of assessment techniques' capabilities and limitations: what they truly measure, how these measures are represented and used, and the questions they seek to answer. These topics are discussed below.

=The Three Categories=
Three categories of models clearly emerge from an analysis of the assessment techniques used in organizations and research labs, considering their characteristics and uses. 28 criteria have allowed us to differentiate assessment techniques that are particularly applicable to social behavior<ref> See [[Assessment_Techniques_-_Characteristics | here details about the 28 criteria, their definition, and regroupement in four grand categories.]]</ref>. The three categories appear as the biggest differentiators from both conceptual and practical standpoints.

The categories presented below offer different understandings of how people function from behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoints. Although each can be useful for addressing questions about people, they also have limitations. Seeing people in context, or not, and with varying nuances, the three models ultimately carry different visions of how people can be understood, how they may show up, grow, and perform.

The analogy of a two-dimensional map is often used to illustrate the importance of accurately understanding and locating behaviors. We also use it to explain the differences among the three models, and the potential challenges and efforts required to move from point A to B. Above all, those models speak to action and, at least partially, account for how action unfolds as we navigate the map.

The three categories are the following, each detailed in a separate article. They are briefly introduced below.

{| class="wikitable" style="width: 100%;"
! width=15%" | Category !! Description
|-
| align="center" | [[Factor_Model | Factor]] || Behavior is precisely measured by its coordinates on the map. The distance and effort required to travel from A to B on the map can be anticipated<ref>The factor model is discussed with more details[[Factor_Model | in this article here.]]</ref>.
|-
| align="center" | [[Trait_Model | Trait]] || Behavior is estimated by proximity; the closer we are to certain locations on the map. Distances to be covered to go from A to B can only be roughly estimated<ref>The trait model is discussed with more details[[Trait_Model | in this article here.]]</ref>.
|-
| align="center" | [[Type_Model |Type]] || Being grouped into broad categories, behavior on the map appears as large areas. This makes it impossible to predict the distances to cover between A and B<ref>The type model is discussed with more details[[Type_Model | in this article here.]]</ref>.
|}

=Factor Model=
[[File:Factor_San Francisco.png|right|200px]]
With the factor model, as the illustration on the right shows, behaviors are precisely measured, like knowing latitude and longitude on a map. When moving from one point to another on the map, it is possible to anticipate the route, calculate the distance, and select the best way.

The factor approach emerged in the 1950s but did not gain acceptance until research from the 1970s to the 1990s promoted a limited number of factors to explain behavioral traits. Systems based on factors work with a limited number of them. We believe at GRI that four is the optimal number. Some models in research work with two, three, five, and up to seven factors.

When used to understand behavior adaptation and individual growth, the factor approach identifies where development starts, where it ends, how it happens, and the effort required to sustain the adaptation.

Potential users for the factor model are executives, managers, and other users of types and traits (see below). Applications of the factor model in organizations include management, leadership, and organizational development, as well as uses related to types and traits (see below).

=Trait Model=
[[File:Trait_San Francisco.png|right|200px]]
As illustrated by the red circle on the right, measures from a trait system indicate how far one is from a target, but that can be from different locations that we don’t know. Additionally, the route and time between locations can only be a rough but impractical estimate; we cannot know either.

The trait model was the first to be used in psychiatry and clinical practice in the late 1800s. It was soon employed for large-scale recruitments in the 1920s, and later for executive search. The number of traits that a system from this model can measure is unlimited. It can be as low as one trait in clinical applications. In organizational applications, one trait can be leadership, creativity, or honesty. In recruitment, the number may be as high as 30. This number can easily double or triple with batteries of tests.

Trait models are not built to understand a person’s development but measure the starting and end points of a development, not how it will occur. That’s another major difference with the factor model.

Potential users of trait systems include clinicians, recruiters, and coaches, but not executives and managers directly. Trait systems are used in organizations for recruitment and vocational guidance. They are also used like type systems (see below), but rarely cover the applications seen with the factor model (see above).

=Type Model=
[[File:Type_San Francisco.png|right|200px]]
Type models provide a rough measure of behaviors. With these systems, you are either in an area, as indicated by the red area in the illustration on the right, or you are out. A type provides a very rough understanding of where the journey starts and ends, like going from the East Coast to California, not how it can happen.

Although the first typologies date back to ancient times, their statistical evaluation is more recent, starting in the 1940s, and their use has grown significantly with the rise of coaching in the late 1980s. Some systems measure only one type (you either have it or do not). Others 4 or up to 20 or 30 types or themes, for what we refer to as multi-typologies.

As for the trait model, the type model doesn’t provide information to understand a person’s development. Unlike trait systems, a type system cannot measure the starting and end points of a development, nor how the development will occur. These are major differences with the trait and factor models.

Uses of type systems typically include coaching, team building, and counselling. Types are not used in recruitment or other uses of the traits and factor models, but only rarely for very rough approximations.

=Measurement=
The preferred technique for measuring social behavior is the questionnaire. However, in our analysis, we had to differentiate the techniques that are forced scenarios from those that are free scenarios. In the first case, forced-scenarios, the items are propositions that invite the participant to score on a five- to ten-point Likert scale, depending on the technique. In the latter case, the free-scenarios, the technique leaves the participant free to choose the situation or scenario associated with the items to be selected or rejected. The items are typically adjectives. We used to refer to free versus forced-choice techniques, but the distinction using “choice” was limited to a few techniques only (namely, DISC-like techniques). The other expression used was “projective,” which, in psychoanalysis, refers to the unconscious self and to items that people unconsciously describe, such as inkblots. But this distinction was inappropriate in our context.

The techniques that have adopted the free scenario strategy, which there are a dozen on the market in the 2020s, and which is the one adopted at GRI, have enabled measuring adaptation and engagement levels in addition to behavior. It has also helped measure and distinguish between Natural, Role, and Effective behaviors, which other techniques that use the force scenario approach don’t<ref>See [[Adaptive_Profile | here a brief definition of the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles]] which are regrouped in the adaptive profile.</ref>.

Interestingly, it is the free-scenario strategy that has helped the factor approach to personality emerge. Then the fixed-scenario took over for measuring the factors being evidenced. The fixed-scenario naturally led to measuring traits and types and does not take the environment into account, unlike techniques using the free-scenario strategy.

=Representation=
The distinction of three models: Factor, Trait, and Type, has primarily been established based on the representation and use of assessment techniques<ref>This refers to the variable T-REPR of the General Framework. See [[ Assessment_Techniques_-_Characteristics#Assessment_Results | here in this article]] for more details.</ref>. The intrinsic qualities predispose the techniques for what can be done with them. Statistics used are of critical importance. How the techniques are published and distributed, and who uses them for what, is also important to consider. Ultimately, the GRI’s general framework helped uncover that the techniques’ representational quality enables what can be done with it, which falls into the three distinct categories highlighted.

The techniques are used to both measure and represent behaviors, but the two aspects, measurement and representation, need to be considered separately, because a technique may use one model for measurement, but its representation may be based on one or a combination of the other two models.

For instance, some techniques measure factors and are thus factor-based. Whatever scales they use, which may vary greatly between the decile and standard deviation scales, they convert the measures of factors into traits or types and use the results as such, rather than using the factors themselves. The same happens with techniques that measure traits, which are represented as types.

The techniques are used as they are represented, not for what they measure. Because of the combinations we see among the models, we differentiate them based on how they are both measured and represented, but primarily on how they are represented.

=Adaptation=
Adaptation is an important aspect of what the three models deal with, because the object of their measure and representation, behavior, is in ongoing flux. There is constantly something happening out there: a critical or minor event, radical change, disruption, crisis, drama, etc., and also from inside: joy, sadness, health issues, lack of sleep, just a bad or exceptional day, psychological challenges, etc., that constantly ask us to act and adapt, the same way actors do on stage.

Additionally, there are always expectations, including from management or HR, and, at a broader level, from our role in the organization, to behave in a certain way and adapt our behavior accordingly.

This important aspect of adaptation has repercussions for how one envisions a person’s growth, provides understanding and support, and ultimately, how the person takes on an assignment or a job and performs, including on an emotional level. Development happens differently for everyone, an aspect revealed or not and with varying degrees of accuracy by the three models.

=Benefits of the Factor Model=
The factor model, with roots dating back to the era of Taylor, has emerged progressively since the 1950s. In social behavior, a major obstacle to their use has been the availability of trait and type models that are easy to understand and use. These two other approaches, however, have limitations that need to be better understood.

The factor model offers a nuanced snapshot of individual behaviors, including most preferred and predictable behaviors, the efforts required to adapt, and engage in the job. It also provides a refined understanding of the behaviors expected at the job, team, and organizational levels, which can be represented the same way as with people, helping to see and manage the gaps between the levels.

With critical nuances and representations that other models cannot handle, the factor model can better serve executives and managers in developing their social skills, coaches and recruiters to work more effectively with them, and researchers investigating and testing new models that evidence people flow and adaptation efforts. In a similar way, type models have helped coaches, and trait models have helped clinicians and recruiters for decades to serve management and organizational needs, but with limited capabilities.

The real competing models to the three models, though, are executives’ and managers’ private techniques. Social behavior is the component of personality that’s the most universal, prevalent, intuitive, and subjective, and the one that takes the longest to educate. By bringing unparalleled precision and utility, including at a strategic level, the factor model provides the missing piece for social skills metrics to enhance decision-making and communication.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]

Main Page

2026-08-11T22:53:11Z

Flc:

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[Assessment_Techniques | From Parallel to Statistics-Based Tools]]=
[[File:Assessment Techniques.png|right|230px]]
* The nature of tools and techniques in organizations
* Assessment techniques components under evaluation
* Standards for comparing techniques
* Utility of assessment techniques
* What adaptive profiles tell

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

Main Page

2026-08-11T22:52:35Z

Flc:

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[Assessment_Techniques | From Parallel to Statistics-Based Tools]]=
[[File:Assessment Techniques.png|right|230px]]
* The nature of tools and techniques in organizations
* Assessment techniques components under evaluation
* Standards for comparing techniques
* Utility of assessment techniques
* What adaptive profiles tell

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

Main Page

2026-08-11T22:52:05Z

Flc: /* Individual_Characteristics */

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[Assessment_Techniques | From Parallel to Statistics-Based Tools]]=
[[File:Assessment Techniques.png|right|230px]]
* The nature of tools and techniques in organizations
* Assessment techniques components under evaluation
* Standards for comparing techniques
* Utility of assessment techniques
* What adaptive profiles tell

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

Main Page

2026-08-11T22:51:56Z

Flc: /* Social Behavior and More */

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[Assessment_Techniques | From Parallel to Statistics-Based Tools]]=
[[File:Assessment Techniques.png|right|230px]]
* The nature of tools and techniques in organizations
* Assessment techniques components under evaluation
* Standards for comparing techniques
* Utility of assessment techniques
* What adaptive profiles tell

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Individual_Characteristics]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The Big 7 characteristics
* Classification of concepts
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

Individual Characteristics

2026-08-11T22:48:37Z

Flc: /* Introduction */

=Introduction=
[[File:Characteristics.png|right|220px]]
This article presents the individual characteristics that underpin everyone's assessments, decision-making, relationship-building, and performance characterization. Characteristics are major factors differentiating individuals. Many characteristics are naturally used in forming judgments, but only a few become significant when considering people’s roles and their management in organizations.

The above aspects are discussed, as well as how the characteristics can be classified to improve performance. Individual characteristics are not only about individuals but also shape expectations for the positions people occupy, how decisions will be made, and how communication will occur. Once a position is occupied, individual characteristics define a model for that position.

=Characteristics' Assessment=
The quality of characteristics is closely linked to the techniques used to assess them. At a minimum, private techniques are the most basic and widespread methods employed by anyone. If not private, techniques may include those used informatively by organizations, esoteric techniques, and other approaches, such as semi-formal, formal, and statistical techniques<ref>The techniques are [[Assessment_Techniques | analyzed in this other article here]].</ref>.

The survey technique that uses a questionnaire and statistical analysis helps achieve a more effective and objective measurement of certain characteristics. It is considered objective because the results are obtained without relying on someone else’s judgment. The interpretation or analysis may involve judgment, but not the measurement itself. Most characteristics are straightforward and can be easily assessed through private techniques. However, other characteristics like abilities and social behavior are more complex and harder to define. They benefit from a standardized process, the use of metrics, and the application of statistics, similar to how any other tool enhances human capabilities.

=The Big Seven=
[[File:Patchwork_Small.png|right|220px]]
Individual characteristics are numerous, although some may be regrouped; only a few are generally considered for performance. As noted above, some are easy to define and assess, while others are less so, even though they are critical. The seven characteristics shown here are commonly used in organizations. They help focus attention when assessing someone for a job, especially when several assessors are involved. Social behavior at the center is the most obvious, visible, and present; however, harder to assess objectively. This characteristic has been at the center of GRI's research project phase 1, which aimed to improve and define performance when social behavior measures were used by leaders and managers. The seven characteristics are as follows, with brief definitions. They are then detailed one by one before other characteristics are discussed.

{| class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
!Characteristic !! Brief Description
|-
| Social Behavior || The way people act, adapt, and perform from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoint.
|-
| Intelligence || The general mental ability that accounts for a person’s intellectual agility, memory capacity, and verbal fluency.
|-
| Values || The beliefs and ideas people have and value the most.
|-
| Abilities || The specific mental and physical aptitudes to perform, which may partially be innate.
|-
| Interests || The preference, attraction, and excitement of working in a job, to learn and execute tasks.
|-
| Skills || The competences, technical or social, that are related to an occupation.
|-
| Experience || The skills that are gained from executing tasks or in jobs over time.
|}

==Social Behavior==
[[File:Patchwork_Behavior.png|right|160px]]
Social behavior is how people interact and adapt from a behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoints. This component of personality tells about how people function, interact, communicate, make decisions, manage, lead, learn, and more.

Social behavior is the characteristic that we assess the most spontaneously and naturally with our private techniques, but the hardest to get right and with nuances. As for measuring temperature, we may have a good intuition and sense of it, but getting to know the exact room temperature is hard. It requires having an indication of what “exact” and “right” mean, an objective measure with a reference point, and a scale.

Personality is a larger concept than social behavior, sometimes equated to behavior, but also including psychiatric and clinical behaviors. Or personality can include cognitive processes like intelligence that are not part of “social behavior” as we define it here. “Social behavior” includes a large scope of behaviors normally observed in people at work and in society, even if those behaviors are sometimes intense or extreme.

The understanding of social behavior can be approximated by some traits or types. Adaptive profiles from a factor-based approach, as we do at GRI, account for nuances, relative stability, and adaptation that other methods can’t. With appropriate metrics, the adaptive profile additionally informs about social behavior’s intensity, the efforts to adapt, motivation, and engagement in the job.

Social behavior is about achieving results and performing like actors on stage by playing a role. Employees and everyone else do the same, like actors, to meet the expectations in their jobs, as they see them. Mindset can also refer to social behavior, as long as it is clear that it relates to how people specifically think and feel about how they and others behave.
Social behavior is omnipresent in our activities. We experience, live them, and have observed them since we were born. They are facing us constantly. When we discuss people, that’s what we talk about. We all have our own sense of how to assess social behavior with our own vocabulary, its nuances, and what we refer to as our private techniques.

==Intelligence==
[[File:Patchwork_Intelligence.png|right|160px]]
Intelligence is a multifaceted concept, encompassing various theoretical frameworks and assessment techniques. It is commonly understood as involving cognitive, verbal and memory capabilities. General Mental Ability (GMA) or intelligence is often measured through standardized tests.

The assessment of intelligence has significantly advanced since the early 1900s with the development of surveys and more sophisticated statistical methods. Early pioneers like Binet and Simon developed scales that introduced the concept of mental age, which later evolved into the use of standard IQ scores that measure specific abilities such as verbal reasoning, numerical reasoning, non-verbal reasoning, and short-term memory. Other influential theories include Spearman's g-factor, which proposes a general intelligence factor alongside specific abilities, and Thurstone's identification of primary mental abilities. Subsequent research by various scholars further expanded the understanding of intelligence. Wechsler's scales, for example, distinguish between verbal, performance, and total IQs, moving beyond the earlier concept of mental age.

Hierarchical models have also emerged, combining different theoretical views to provide a broader understanding of intelligence. These models usually place a general intelligence factor at the top, with more specific factors and core abilities below. Besides traditional cognitive intelligence, the idea of emotional intelligence (EQ) has become more important, highlighting a person's social skills, empathy, and self-awareness. Additionally, Gardner's theory of Multiple Intelligences proposes that individuals have a wide variety of unique intelligences, challenging the idea of a single, universal measure of intelligence. In professional environments, proxy measures like educational achievements are often used to assess intelligence.

We can use our intellect to exert control over our social behavior, and we adapt thanks to it. But our ability to change our behavior in this way is limited. Although IQ is important in many jobs, and it is important to assess intelligence, how we behave and are motivated is distinct and uncorrelated to our IQ. Not only is this clear from research studies, but it is also demonstrated by the adaptive profiles. There is no single profile that is the smartest; anyone can be smart in their own way.

==Values==
[[File:Patchwork_Values.png|right|160px]]
Values are personal beliefs and principles that individuals consider important, shaping their attitudes, behaviors, and decisions across various areas of life, including work, society, religion, and politics. They act as an internal compass, establishing standards for what is viewed as appropriate and desirable.

The concept of value can be likened to interest, although values are generally considered more fundamental and widespread. When deeply rooted, values reflect strong preferences for certain activities and behaviors. In educational settings, values have been connected to academic choices and extracurricular involvement. While they are helpful for emphasizing desired behaviors, measuring values can be difficult because of their subjective and adaptable nature. For example, assigning "moral" values to someone in a particular context suggests their actions are consistent with a broad range of norms within that setting, often validated by selected examples from that individual.

Values, preferences, interests, and social behavior are interconnected. A person's value system offers guidelines for evaluating their own actions and those of others, shaping their attitudes and choices. This complex relationship between concepts is clarified by an individual's adaptive profile, which shows varying levels of behavior intensity and adaptation.

Personal values are also linked to cultural values and societal norms, with corporate values playing a crucial role in establishing expectations and shared understandings within organizations, particularly concerning social behaviors.

The value concept is [[Values | further developed in this article here.]]

==Abilities==
[[File:Patchwork_Abilities.png|right|160px]]
In psychology, the concept of abilities is closely related to that of intelligence. Abilities, as for instance in Thurstone's theory, include verbal comprehension and memory. Mental abilities and cognitive functions like attention and language can be measured by assessment techniques.

In common language, abilities designate the manual or intellectual aptitudes to perform, which often imply inherent gifts or education. For example, a person might have a natural ability for an art, sports, or a language. With that definition, abilities tend to remain stable throughout life and influence how people process information and execute tasks. Abilities differ from skills in that skills are also developed through learning and practice.
Abilities are more specific to certain roles, such as high verbal ability, which is valuable for writing, while spatial ability is important for an engineer working in computer-aided design, or being 6-feet tall is valuable for performing in basketball and volleyball.

==Interests==
[[File:Patchwork_Interests.png|right|160px]]
Interests in executing some tasks and performing a job are the expression of a preference that excites attention and curiosity. In sports, for example, we speak of an interest in playing football or lacrosse. A person may be interested in working in one company or another, on an activity, with certain people, a team, and a manager, or under certain conditions. What’s more, interests grow over time. What a person is interested in builds through contact with others in real situations within organizations, through internships and apprenticeships, or by occupying and executing a job.

Interests can be of different natures, including social, financial, operational, and ethical. The way an organization balances and responds to these interests is critical for its success. Interest, engagement, and motivation work in concert for a person to perform in a job, overcome challenges, and deliver results efficiently. Interests—and lack of interest—is also informed by an adaptive profile from a behavioral standpoint, and the related emotions to perform in a job.

==Skills==
[[File:Patchwork_Skills.png|right|160px]]
Skills refer to the dexterity, speed, precision, and efficiency with which actions or cognition are performed. A skilled person is someone who can perform quickly and well. Skills can be manual and behavioral (overt behavior), or intellectual (covert behavior). We can evidence skills, for instance, in software coding, consulting, mechanical engineering, and accounting as well as in plumbing, welding, painting, or gardening. A skill is flexible and can be taught, practiced, and improved over time.

A skill is measurable and can be demonstrated through qualifications, certifications, and performance assessments. The concept of skills is distinct from that of intelligence or abilities in that it implies that it is acquired through deliberate practice, education, and experience. It similarly applies to managerial and social skills that can be learned and acquired with appropriate context, tools, and learning process.

==Experience==
[[File:Patchwork_Experience.png|right|160px]]
Unlike skills and behaviors learned in simulated or classroom settings, those gained through experience result from direct, concrete, and practical contact with facts or events. The reality, intensity, and diversity of those contacts give the skills and behaviors some nuances and meanings rooted in those situations. Being learned in the field, skills and behaviors derived from experience tend to be less general and more closely tied to specific contexts than those acquired more abstractly and deductively off the field.

Experience helps build an intuitive and nuanced appreciation of skills that allow one to act with ease, confidence, and speed. Experience can create agility, both physical and intellectual. Inexperience, on the other hand, may cause errors or delay execution, yet at the same time, it can also bring fresh insights and perspectives. A number of years of experience, however, cannot tell how skills were learned, expressed, or shared. Looking at experience, thus, always needs to be informed by how it builds, something that social behavior, as it is informed by an adaptive profile, can tell.

Experience is particularly important with managerial and social skills, often learned informally, through trial and error, by working with real people and situations. This kind of learning usually takes time. Experience is also essential for all expert manual or intellectual work that demands dexterity and precision. When learning social behavior with GRI’s adaptive profiles, creating meaning on symbols through real, practical, social experience is key, as it has been emphasized in the symbolic interactionism theory. Experience is also central to the concept of enactment, which designates the emergence of knowledge through the presence of individuals in the field.

=More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_More.png|right|220px]]
The characteristics used in organizations are not limited to these seven. Depending on the industry, company, country, and local influences, other concepts are applied that, in some way, overlap with the seven. A brief definition is provided below, including which other concepts they most closely compare to.

===Personality===
Personality is a broad concept that includes social behavior, intelligence, abilities, etc., and clinical behavior that is assessed by therapists and psychiatrists. The history of personality assessment started from psychiatry and therapy, and later expanded to large-scale recruitments. For this reason and for these applications, personality has been measured with traits. Social behavior, however, accounts for people’s behavior in the “normal” range, which does not include clinical behaviors.<ref>A brief history and prospects of personality assessment is[[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect | discussed in this article here.]]</ref>

===Character===
Like personality, character is a broad concept. It combines mental and ethical traits, such as honesty, courage, and integrity. Although character, values, and personality are three distinct concepts, they are interconnected. Personality is centered on how people act, values on beliefs, including moral ones, and character on mental and ethical qualities. All tend to explain how the others do. Social behavior overlaps with the three on how someone behaves, expresses themselves, and also thinks, and feels, including about their values and ethics.

===Competences===
The competence concept is a generic concept that combines skills, abilities, experiences, and more. Competency models focus on the management of knowledge and other characteristics acquired during training, most often, especially in large organizations, with HRMS (Human Resources Management System), Talent Management platforms, or Learning and development (L&D) platforms. Competency models are used by management and Human Resources to define, train, and use the competencies in recruitment, development, and succession planning. However, competency models underplay the emotions involved in developing behaviors and soft skills and often end up with lists of behavioral attributes that are conflicting. Competency management innately applies to technical rather than social skills.

===Attitudes===
Attitudes are considered to be antecedent to behaviors and of a cognitive, emotional, or sentimental nature or as a disposition to act. They may vary depending on the context or mood. Behaviors could be anticipated from the knowledge of someone’s attitudes. In everyday language, attitudes and behaviors are often used interchangeably. An attitude cannot be apprehended directly. Based on values and beliefs, attitudes are affected by the forces of the situation before being verbal or non-verbal behaviors and expressed. People most often act in accordance with their attitudes and intentions, which are themselves influenced by their values and motivation. Attitudes can be anticipated from affective, cognitive, and behavioral data as it is measured in the adaptive profile.

===Aptitudes===
An aptitude is the potential to perform certain activities, whether physical or mental, developed or undeveloped, in a particular domain. In psychology, the concept is close to that of abilities when viewed as inborn, or skills that can be developed by learning, or a combination of the two. In everyday language, aptitudes refer to the possibility of talents or skills for a person to occupy a position. Aptitude refers to a specific area: verbal, spatial, mechanical, business, management, critical thinking, logical reasoning, etc., that can be measured. Students get screened for aptitude through the SAT, GRE, GATE tests, or other certifications.

===Knowledge===
Knowledge is the information memorized by a person and the ability to use it when dealing with a specific topic. Knowledge often involves the possession of information learned through experience. We speak of knowledge of a foreign language, in computer science, biology, mechanics, management, culture, or any other general or specific field.

The storage and retrieval mechanisms make an unequivocal parallel with a computer’s functioning. A person’s knowledge must be distinguished from doing and acting on it, or the speed of processing information, which fall into the categories of social behavior and intelligence.

===Training===
By training, we mean classes, masterclasses, studies, courses, or programs attended by someone, which usually result in receiving a diploma or certificate. Training makes it possible to acquire knowledge and skills in a formal way through reading, role play, case studies, homework, presentations, pitches, etc., on a particular topic. A training predisposes a person to then express skills in a real context, adapting those skills and continuing to develop them in the field.

Compared to learning by experience, learning by training is more general, less specific to an environment, but is also more adaptable. It is less nuanced and trustworthy for not having yet been confronted with practical reality and for being only a "laboratory" repertoire.

===Culture & language===
The culture specifies the context in which a person’s skills, behaviors, and abilities were acquired: country, region, state, time, and other factors that condition the habits, language, food, norms, and protocols. Culture forms attitudes, values, personality, and social habits.

===Physical and health===
Physical and health characteristics are of particular importance in positions that require them, as for instance for delivery, being an athlete, acting a role on stage, being a fashion models who must have certain aesthetic or physiognomic dispositions.

===Talent===
Talent is a synonym for aptitude, natural abilities, and skills in a specific domain that can be work-related or not, extending to sports, music, and art in general. Some personality assessments use the word “talent” and a multiple typology approach to assist personal development and coaching, although they focus only on the social behavior component. By that definition, talent is part of someone's character, which needs to be understood and valued.

=Even More Characteristics=
[[File:Patchwork_Even_More.png|right|220px]]
There are many additional characteristics beyond those listed above. Some may be surprising, but all have been observed at GRI over the years, including even esoteric ones, within an organizational context. Some characteristics can easily be obtained by social media or a resumé; Others by interview. Some are ethically and legally questionable. All characteristics can be related to their measurement techniques<ref>The assessment techniques[[ Assessment_Techniques | are discussed in this article here]]</ref>. Any distinctive characteristic on which an appreciation or judgment is potentially based must be considered.

The reality is that everyone bases their judgment on characteristics that are not explicitly articulated, such as when feeling embarrassment, doubt, or, conversely, confidence and validation, without being able to label the origin of those emotions. Professional recruiters, HR experts, and leaders are not exempt. Competence models and HRIS systems do not store them in files. However, judgment in recruiting, communicating, managing, and organizing is based on some of those characteristics, as it is for everyone.

Studies on leadership highlight characteristics such as appearance or clothing <ref>Bass B. M. (1990). </ref>. Bass and Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: theory, research, and managerial application. New York: Free Press. First published in 1974.</ref>. Gesture is emphasized in non-verbal communication<ref>Watzlavick P., Beavin H., Jackson, D. (1972). Une logique de la communication. Paris, Le Seuil.</ref>. Guittet regroups the characteristics of paralanguage into four categories<ref>Guittet, A. (1986). L’entretien. Paris, Armand Colin.</ref>:
* Posture: tone, gestures, bodily contact (handshakes, affectionate gestures, etc.), hand movements, crossing of legs, way of standing at the table, walking or standing in public.
* Body image: clothing choices that go along with fashion trends or not, giving a sign of belonging to a social group.
* Face and mimicry: micro verbal expressions, signs of attention, impatience, astonishment, support, or rejection. Eye movements, gaze fixed, fleeing, or determined, etc.<ref>Brandler, R., Grinder, J. (1984) Les secrets de la communication. Editions Reuille.</ref>
* Territory: the space that exists between individuals<ref>Hall, E. T. (1954). The silent language. New York, Doubleday.</ref>. It also concerns movements, agile, fast, and heavy.

Whether we want it or not, other characteristics get into our evaluations and judgments. It’s most often a matter of being aware of them and being educated to minimize or eliminate bias from them. The list continues:
* Age, height, weight, gender, skin color, and cultural and social origin
* Family and business connections
* Place of residence
* Association, political group, religious group, work team, committee, and more generally, the groups to which one belongs
* Corpulence (morphopsychology): endomorph, mesomorph, or ectomorph<ref> Kretschmer, E. (1936). Physique and Character. New York: Harcourt.</ref>
* The shape of the skull (phrenology) or the shape of the face
* Oral expression. The way of expressing oneself in public, in private. The intonations, pitch, or range of the voice. Eloquence
* The written expression. Fluency and writing style
* The astral theme according to the day and hour of birth (astrology)
* A person’s numbers (numerology)
* The hand’s lines, shapes, and features (palmistry)
* Handwriting (graphology)
* Someone’s gaze
* Eyes’ color<ref>Larsson M, Pedersen NL, Stattin H. Associations between iris characteristics and personality in adulthood. Biol Psychol. 2007 May;75(2):165-75. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.01.007. Epub 2007 Feb 1. PMID: 17343974.</ref>
* Physiological characteristics such as DNA, blood type (hematopsychology), or fingerprints
* The perception sensitivity in terms of taste, smell, sight, hearing, or touch
* The pleasant or repulsive smell<ref>There is this story about young adult Steve Jobs who had a repulsive smell, that went on for many years; An information obtained from people who worked with him. There are many similar other stories. Such cases are usually handled by managers, or if not HR.</ref>
* Food and body hygiene (dental hygiene analysis is still practiced in some Asian and African countries)
* How one shakes hands, has sweaty hands, opens or closes the door, sits, stands up, etc.

The list of characteristics is not complete, but all of the above have been seen in organizations. Some characteristics are kept private or only partly acknowledged. Attitudes toward oneself and others, along with development strategies, are influenced by the nature and strength of these characteristics and how much people believe in them.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]

Main Page

2026-08-11T22:44:59Z

Flc: /* The Three Categories of Tools */

__NOTOC__
=Welcome to Growth Resources=
[[File:GRI Logo_Framed.png|right|220px]]
The resources on this website offer detailed background and scientific information on GRI's research framework, assessment techniques, and the adaptive profiles. They contribute to a larger effort to enhance individual and organizational performance by using more objective data on people.

We hope the resources answer your questions; however, they are more academic than practical and cannot provide the hands-on experience needed to learn and apply the adaptive profiles. For effective learning, a masterclass experience facilitated by experts is essential. Similar to learning a new sport or musical instrument, you will need real-world practice to challenge the techniques you already use and to deepen your understanding of people, their teams, and their companies through the profiles.

The masterclass will help you learn and apply your new knowledge at the same time. Contact Growth Resources or one of its affiliates to learn more about GRI's masterclass, management tools, and platform.

=[[Performance_Models | Performance Models Revisited]]=
[[File:Home_Performance.png|right|230px]]
* What individual and organizational performance mean
* Review of various performance models
* Organization's well-being (social) performance
* Organization's effective (strategic) performance
* Managing performance

=[[Use_of_Tools_and_Concepts |Use of Tools and Concepts]]=
[[File:Home_Potential Uses.png|right|230px]]
* Practical and abstract use of tools and the concepts they measure
* Use in organizational development, leadership, management, and recruitment
* Use in coaching, clinical settings, and for medium effect
* Theoretical use in self- and social-awareness, and learning
* Pragmatic use of assessments; their language and signs

=[[The Three Categories of Tools | The Three Categories of Tools]]=
[[File:Home_What_Keeps_Them_Apart.png|right|230px]]
* The three categories explained
* How measures are represented and used
* Getting the measures
* Intensity and adaptation measured
* Benefits of the factor-based model

=[[Assessment_Techniques | From Parallel to Statistics-Based Tools]]=
[[File:Assessment Techniques.png|right|230px]]
* The nature of tools and techniques in organizations
* Assessment techniques components under evaluation
* Standards for comparing techniques
* Utility of assessment techniques
* What adaptive profiles tell

=[[ Individual_Characteristics | Social Behavior and More]]=
[[File:Home_Individual Characteristics.png|right|230px]]
* The many characteristics we use when assessing people
* The big 7 of personality
* Details on Social performance, values, and intelligence
* Techniques used to assess individual characteristics
* Classification of techniques

=[[ Language_and_Signs | The Power of Signs]]=
[[File:Home_The Power of Signs.png|right|230px]]
* Signs for understanding people and their organizations
* Fundamentals of semiotics
* Adaptive profiles as signs and part of a broader picture
* Signs produced by assessment techniques
* Developing new, effective meanings of signs

=[[ General_Framework | General Framework]]=
[[File:GRI Research Framework.png|right|230px]]
* Objectives and use of the framework
* Framework's antecedent, independent, and dependent variables
* Framework development over its three steps
* How to test the framework
* Benchmarking assessment techniques

=Quick Links=
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Performance Performance Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Assessment Individuals' Assessment Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Personality_Assessment Assessment Tools Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:General_Framework General Framework Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Row_Results Rowing Study Women 8+ U23 2016] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Articles All Articles] - [https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Category:Notes All Notes]

[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents User's Guide on using the wiki.] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Configuration_settings Configuration settings] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] - [https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/mediawiki-announce.lists.wikimedia.org/ MediaWiki release mailing list] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Localisation#Translation_resources Localise MediaWiki] - [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Manual:Combating_spam Combat spam on the wiki] -

[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:About About Growth Resources] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Privacy_policy Privacy policy] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:Copyrights Copyright] -
[https://wiki.gri.co/index.php/Growth_Resources:General_disclaimer Disclaimers]

The Three Categories of Tools

2026-08-11T22:44:02Z

Flc: /* Benefits of the Factor Model */

=Introduction=
[[File:Three models.png|right|250px]]
For decades, researchers and the personality assessment industry have studied and refined various methods for measuring personality in organizations. These methods are used for hiring, personal development, coaching, and more, including in clinical settings. We at GRI have reviewed these methods by analyzing their effects and benefits on individual and organizational performance, how they were developed, and by studying their users: traditional users like human resources managers, recruiters, coaches, and clinicians, as well as managers and executives.

In social matters, unlike in technology, change happens slowly. As for assessment techniques, particularly with personality, as their history shows, understanding their true potential takes time<ref>See [[Personality_Assessment_Story_and_Prospect|here a brief history, and some perspectives about the progress of personality assessments.]]</ref>. This extended process may be due to a combination of factors: the abstract nature of the concepts being measured, the effort needed to learn these techniques, and the emotional attachment people develop toward them.

Assessment techniques can reveal their real capabilities through actual cases that genuinely matter. These cases usually come from organizations that care not only about performance in finance and production but also about how these outcomes are delivered from behavioral, cognitive, and emotional perspectives.

Using both qualitative and quantitative methods has helped us gain a detailed understanding of assessment techniques' capabilities and limitations: what they truly measure, how these measures are represented and used, and the questions they seek to answer. These topics are discussed below.

=The Three Categories=
Three categories of models clearly emerge from an analysis of the assessment techniques used in organizations and research labs, considering their characteristics and uses. 28 criteria have allowed us to differentiate assessment techniques that are particularly applicable to social behavior<ref> See [[Assessment_Techniques_-_Characteristics | here details about the 28 criteria, their definition, and regroupement in four grand categories.]]</ref>. The three categories appear as the biggest differentiators from both conceptual and practical standpoints.

The categories presented below offer different understandings of how people function from behavioral, emotional, and cognitive standpoints. Although each can be useful for addressing questions about people, they also have limitations. Seeing people in context, or not, and with varying nuances, the three models ultimately carry different visions of how people can be understood, how they may show up, grow, and perform.

The analogy of a two-dimensional map is often used to illustrate the importance of accurately understanding and locating behaviors. We also use it to explain the differences among the three models, and the potential challenges and efforts required to move from point A to B. Above all, those models speak to action and, at least partially, account for how action unfolds as we navigate the map.

The three categories are the following, each detailed in a separate article. They are briefly introduced below.

{| class="wikitable" style="width: 100%;"
! width=15%" | Category !! Description
|-
| align="center" | [[Factor_Model | Factor]] || Behavior is precisely measured by its coordinates on the map. The distance and effort required to travel from A to B on the map can be anticipated<ref>The factor model is discussed with more details[[Factor_Model | in this article here.]]</ref>.
|-
| align="center" | [[Trait_Model | Trait]] || Behavior is estimated by proximity; the closer we are to certain locations on the map. Distances to be covered to go from A to B can only be roughly estimated<ref>The trait model is discussed with more details[[Trait_Model | in this article here.]]</ref>.
|-
| align="center" | [[Type_Model |Type]] || Being grouped into broad categories, behavior on the map appears as large areas. This makes it impossible to predict the distances to cover between A and B<ref>The type model is discussed with more details[[Type_Model | in this article here.]]</ref>.
|}

=Factor Model=
[[File:Factor_San Francisco.png|right|200px]]
With the factor model, as the illustration on the right shows, behaviors are precisely measured, like knowing latitude and longitude on a map. When moving from one point to another on the map, it is possible to anticipate the route, calculate the distance, and select the best way.

The factor approach emerged in the 1950s but did not gain acceptance until research from the 1970s to the 1990s promoted a limited number of factors to explain behavioral traits. Systems based on factors work with a limited number of them. We believe at GRI that four is the optimal number. Some models in research work with two, three, five, and up to seven factors.

When used to understand behavior adaptation and individual growth, the factor approach identifies where development starts, where it ends, how it happens, and the effort required to sustain the adaptation.

Potential users for the factor model are executives, managers, and other users of types and traits (see below). Applications of the factor model in organizations include management, leadership, and organizational development, as well as uses related to types and traits (see below).

=Trait Model=
[[File:Trait_San Francisco.png|right|200px]]
As illustrated by the red circle on the right, measures from a trait system indicate how far one is from a target, but that can be from different locations that we don’t know. Additionally, the route and time between locations can only be a rough but impractical estimate; we cannot know either.

The trait model was the first to be used in psychiatry and clinical practice in the late 1800s. It was soon employed for large-scale recruitments in the 1920s, and later for executive search. The number of traits that a system from this model can measure is unlimited. It can be as low as one trait in clinical applications. In organizational applications, one trait can be leadership, creativity, or honesty. In recruitment, the number may be as high as 30. This number can easily double or triple with batteries of tests.

Trait models are not built to understand a person’s development but measure the starting and end points of a development, not how it will occur. That’s another major difference with the factor model.

Potential users of trait systems include clinicians, recruiters, and coaches, but not executives and managers directly. Trait systems are used in organizations for recruitment and vocational guidance. They are also used like type systems (see below), but rarely cover the applications seen with the factor model (see above).

=Type Model=
[[File:Type_San Francisco.png|right|200px]]
Type models provide a rough measure of behaviors. With these systems, you are either in an area, as indicated by the red area in the illustration on the right, or you are out. A type provides a very rough understanding of where the journey starts and ends, like going from the East Coast to California, not how it can happen.

Although the first typologies date back to ancient times, their statistical evaluation is more recent, starting in the 1940s, and their use has grown significantly with the rise of coaching in the late 1980s. Some systems measure only one type (you either have it or do not). Others 4 or up to 20 or 30 types or themes, for what we refer to as multi-typologies.

As for the trait model, the type model doesn’t provide information to understand a person’s development. Unlike trait systems, a type system cannot measure the starting and end points of a development, nor how the development will occur. These are major differences with the trait and factor models.

Uses of type systems typically include coaching, team building, and counselling. Types are not used in recruitment or other uses of the traits and factor models, but only rarely for very rough approximations.

=Measurement=
The preferred technique for measuring social behavior is the questionnaire. However, in our analysis, we had to differentiate the techniques that are forced scenarios from those that are free scenarios. In the first case, forced-scenarios, the items are propositions that invite the participant to score on a five- to ten-point Likert scale, depending on the technique. In the latter case, the free-scenarios, the technique leaves the participant free to choose the situation or scenario associated with the items to be selected or rejected. The items are typically adjectives. We used to refer to free versus forced-choice techniques, but the distinction using “choice” was limited to a few techniques only (namely, DISC-like techniques). The other expression used was “projective,” which, in psychoanalysis, refers to the unconscious self and to items that people unconsciously describe, such as inkblots. But this distinction was inappropriate in our context.

The techniques that have adopted the free scenario strategy, which there are a dozen on the market in the 2020s, and which is the one adopted at GRI, have enabled measuring adaptation and engagement levels in addition to behavior. It has also helped measure and distinguish between Natural, Role, and Effective behaviors, which other techniques that use the force scenario approach don’t<ref>See [[Adaptive_Profile | here a brief definition of the Natural, Role, and Effective profiles]] which are regrouped in the adaptive profile.</ref>.

Interestingly, it is the free-scenario strategy that has helped the factor approach to personality emerge. Then the fixed-scenario took over for measuring the factors being evidenced. The fixed-scenario naturally led to measuring traits and types and does not take the environment into account, unlike techniques using the free-scenario strategy.

=Representation=
The distinction of three models: Factor, Trait, and Type, has primarily been established based on the representation and use of assessment techniques<ref>This refers to the variable T-REPR of the General Framework. See [[ Assessment_Techniques_-_Characteristics#Assessment_Results | here in this article]] for more details.</ref>. The intrinsic qualities predispose the techniques for what can be done with them. Statistics used are of critical importance. How the techniques are published and distributed, and who uses them for what, is also important to consider. Ultimately, the GRI’s general framework helped uncover that the techniques’ representational quality enables what can be done with it, which falls into the three distinct categories highlighted.

The techniques are used to both measure and represent behaviors, but the two aspects, measurement and representation, need to be considered separately, because a technique may use one model for measurement, but its representation may be based on one or a combination of the other two models.

For instance, some techniques measure factors and are thus factor-based. Whatever scales they use, which may vary greatly between the decile and standard deviation scales, they convert the measures of factors into traits or types and use the results as such, rather than using the factors themselves. The same happens with techniques that measure traits, which are represented as types.

The techniques are used as they are represented, not for what they measure. Because of the combinations we see among the models, we differentiate them based on how they are both measured and represented, but primarily on how they are represented.

=Adaptation=
Adaptation is an important aspect of what the three models deal with, because the object of their measure and representation, behavior, is in ongoing flux. There is constantly something happening out there: a critical or minor event, radical change, disruption, crisis, drama, etc., and also from inside: joy, sadness, health issues, lack of sleep, just a bad or exceptional day, psychological challenges, etc., that constantly ask us to act, the same way actors do on stage.

Additionally, there are always expectations, including from management or HR, and, at a broader level, from our role in the organization, to behave in a certain way and adapt our behavior accordingly.

This important aspect of adaptation has repercussions for how one envisions a person’s growth, provides understanding and support, and ultimately, how the person takes on an assignment or a job and performs, including on an emotional level. Development happens differently for everyone, an aspect revealed or not and with varying degrees of accuracy by the three models.

=Benefits of the Factor Model=
The factor model, with roots dating back to the era of Taylor, has emerged progressively since the 1950s. In social behavior, a major obstacle to their use has been the availability of trait and type models that are easy to understand and use. These two other approaches, however, have limitations that need to be better understood.

The factor model offers a nuanced snapshot of individual behaviors, including most preferred and predictable behaviors, the efforts required to adapt, and engage in the job. It also provides a refined understanding of the behaviors expected at the job, team, and organizational levels, which can be represented the same way as with people, helping to see and manage the gaps between the levels.

With critical nuances and representations that other models cannot handle, the factor model can better serve executives and managers in developing their social skills, coaches and recruiters to work more effectively with them, and researchers investigating and testing new models that evidence people flow and adaptation efforts. In a similar way, type models have helped coaches, and trait models have helped clinicians and recruiters for decades to serve management and organizational needs, but with limited capabilities.

The real competing models to the three models, though, are executives’ and managers’ private techniques. Social behavior is the component of personality that’s the most universal, prevalent, intuitive, and subjective, and the one that takes the longest to educate. By bringing unparalleled precision and utility, including at a strategic level, the factor model provides the missing piece for social skills metrics to enhance decision-making and communication.

=Notes=

[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Assessment]]