Framework First Test

Testing the Hypotheses

The project hypotheses were first tested on two companies, with three executives each. In both companies, executives and their managers had been trained in the adaptive profiles. All used them in a wide range of applications. Both companies were in a position to share measures of economic performance, and the adaptive profiles of their leaders and employees, at two time intervals. The leaders and other managers were interviewed following an interview plan.

The advantage of this approach is that it allows triangulation of information from a minimum number of people. Neither company was subject to critical events, internal or external, that could have prevented the longitudinal study.

Posini

The first case, Posini, is a subsidiary of a global pharmaceutical company. Its activity is focused on distribution. It is organized into two sales teams with a total of around 350 employees. The data collected on the two sales teams allowed comparisons at two time points, t1 and t2.

Qualibank

The second case, Qualibank, is a company of about twenty people founded and led by its CEO. It specializes in the marketing of promotional items to bank card holders. It employs a team of teleoperators for incoming calls during the annual direct marketing campaign, which occurs at year's end.

Between the times of collecting information at t1, t2, and t3, the situations allowed comparisons over time on the impact of using the assessment technique and on the results measured using both objective and subjective indicators within the teleoperator team.

Common Characteristics

Qualibank and Posini were analyzed from different angles: the companies' market positions, deployment timelines, people in place, organizational structures, and their contacts with the facilitator. In both cases, markets are optimistic and economic results are excellent. The differences in size, organization, and sector between the two companies allowed distinct analyses, avoiding the possibility that some environmental variables or those intrinsic to the organization were present in one company but not the other.

The only common link between these two companies and their interviewed leaders is the use of the same assessment technique and their training in it. In both cases, the leaders and managers remained in place over the time interval t1 to t2. For Qualibank, the change in leadership at t3 prompted an analysis of the effects of reduced use of the assessment technique, but in a situation nevertheless comparable to that of t1 and t2.

Collection of Data, Coding and Scoring

The elements collected from each company at different contact times were transcribed. The six executives and managers were interviewed using an interview grid to analyze the uses of behavior assessments. The identification of the assessment's uses by the six people being interviewed was carried out by coding on 114 indicators across 14 variables.

Once coded, the interview elements associated with each indicator were identified and reported person-by-person, variable-by-variable. A total of 814 interview items were reported in this way. Each item was analyzed and commented on. A score on a scale of three or four values ​​was assigned to each of the 109 indicators for each person.

The scores were established beforehand based on the work carried out on the large exploration field. Finally, a summary analysis of the uses person by person was carried out. The findings were reported in separate articles.

Data Analysis and Conclusions

The person-by-person analysis enables understanding and, qualitatively and quantitatively, ensures the appropriate use of the assessment technique across its different uses.

The companies’ performance tests included more general-use elements than those identified in the executives' interviews. The analysis of the companies included other elements collected from other stakeholders or other secondary sources.

The rules instituted at the company level regarding the use of the assessment technique are important to underscore. These rules were accompanied by varying degrees of use constraints. In phase 1, these aspects were initially grouped under the heading “General Policy” and used as a mediating variable. This variable was later added in phases 2 and 3 to the antecedent variable “Environment,” which includes the organization and its polices.

The measurements taken at t1 and t2 for Posini, and at t1, t2, and t3 for Qualibank, allowed for the assessment of the evolution of the different performance values. The analysis, conducted in parallel on the variables of use and performance, highlighted whether one or the other co-evolved.

All cohort data were commented, and the three groups of performance variables were then analyzed on a company-by-company basis. Finally, the hypotheses were analyzed. The conclusions on the relationship between personality assessment use and performance were provided for each of the two cases tested.

The two analyses and conclusions were reported in two separate articles.