Anticipated Conclusions

Introduction

Based on observations of the use of an assessment technique by its user and measurements of the variables’ indicators over time, it is possible to validate or reject the hypotheses. The validation conditions for the hypothesis are specified below.

To test the general framework, the antecedent variables must be specified and measured, such as the user's role, the technique used, the company, and the publisher's distribution model for the assessment technique.

With the first framework, the focus was on leaders and managers; the assessment technique used was a factor approach, in the same category of techniques assessing social behavior as the GRI technique. The tested environments were two companies called Qualibank and Posini.

Other hypotheses can be added using the same methodology, leveraging the variables and indicators already defined. The hypotheses and anticipated conclusions presented below for the general framework apply similarly to the first framework designed in Step 1.

Practical Use

Hypothesis 1

Reminder of hypothesis 1. The correlation between using the assessment technique and organizational performance is more likely if the technique is used in organizational development.

Hypothesis 1 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 1 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, of the following variables at the same time:

• Use in an organizational development (O-)
• Strategic Performance (P-)

Hypothesis 1 invalidation. Hypothesis 1 would be invalidated in the opposite cases:

• Greater use of the assessment technique in organizational development and a decrease in strategic performance suggest that, despite its use in this application, there is less concordance between the social behaviors people exhibit and those expected in positions and teams.
• A decrease in the use of the assessment technique in organizational development and an increase in strategic performance suggest that social behaviors, as shown in the Effective profiles, are closer to job expectations as expressed in the PBI (job profile), whereas the assessment technique is less used in this application.

Hypothesis 2

Reminder of hypothesis 2. The correlation between the use of the assessment technique and performance is stronger when the technique is applied in leadership and people management.

Hypothesis 2 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 2 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, of the following variables and indicators at the same time:

• Use in leadership and management (L-)
• Social performance (Q-)

Hypothesis 2 invalidation. Hypothesis 2 would be invalidated in the opposite cases:

• Greater use of the assessment technique in leadership and management, and a decrease in social performance, suggest that, despite its use in this application, there is increased adaptation and reduced engagement.
• A decrease in the use of the assessment technique in leadership and management, and an increase in social performance, suggest there is increased engagement and decreased adaptation, whereas the assessment technique is used less in this application.

Hypothesis 3

Reminder of hypothesis 3. The correlation between the use of the assessment technique and performance is stronger when the technique is used in coaching.

Hypothesis 3 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 3 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, at the same time for the following variables:

• Use in coaching (G-)
• Social performance (Q-)

Hypothesis 3 Invalidation. Hypothesis 3 would be invalidated in the opposite cases:

• Greater use of the assessment technique in coaching and a decrease in social performance suggest that, despite its use in this application, there is increased adaptation and reduced engagement.
• A decrease in the use of the assessment technique in coaching and an increase in social performance suggest increased engagement and decreased adaptation, whereas the assessment technique is used less in this application.

Hypothesis 4

Reminder of hypothesis 4. The correlation between using the assessment technique and performance is stronger when the assessment technique is used in recruitment.

Hypothesis 4 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 4 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, at the same time for the following variables:

• Use in recruitment (S-)
• Strategic performance (P-)

Hypothesis 4 Invalidation. Hypothesis 4 would be invalidated in the opposite cases:

• Greater use of the assessment technique in recruitment and a decrease in strategic performance suggest that, despite its use in this application, there is less concordance between the social behaviors people exhibit and those expected in positions and teams.
• A decrease in the use of the assessment technique in recruitment, and an increase in strategic performance, suggest that social behaviors, as shown in the Effective profiles, are closer to job expectations as expressed in the PBI (job profile), whereas the assessment technique is less used in this application.

Hypothesis 5

Reminder of hypothesis 5. The correlation between the use of the assessment technique and performance is stronger when the technique is applied in clinical settings.

Hypothesis 5 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 5 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, at the same time for the following variables:

• Use in a clinical setting (N-)
• Social performance (Q-)

Hypothesis 5 Invalidation. Hypothesis 5 would be invalidated in the opposite cases:

• Greater use of the assessment technique in clinical settings and a decrease in social performance suggest that, despite its use in this application, there is increased adaptation and reduced engagement.
• A decrease in the use of the assessment technique in clinical settings and an increase in social performance suggest increased engagement and decreased adaptation, whereas the assessment technique is used less in this application.

Hypothesis 6

Reminder of hypothesis 6. The correlation between the use of the assessment technique and performance is stronger when the technique has a medium effect.

Hypothesis 6 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 6 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, at the same time for the following variables:

• Use of the medium effect (D-)
• Social Performance (Q-)

Hypothesis 6 invalidation. Hypothesis 6 would be invalidated in the opposite cases:

• Greater use of the assessment technique for medium effects and a decrease in social performance suggest that, despite its use in this application, there is increased adaptation and reduced engagement.
• A decrease in the use of the assessment technique for medium effects and an increase in social performance suggest increased engagement and decreased adaptation, whereas the assessment technique is used less in this application.

Hypothesis 7

Reminder of hypothesis 7. The correlation between using the assessment technique and performance is even stronger when the technique is applied simultaneously in organizational development, leadership, and recruitment.

Hypothesis 7 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 7 is verified if over the observation period:

• Hypotheses 1, 2, and 4 are verified. (O-, L-, S-)
• Hypotheses 8 to 11 are all verified. (T-, U-, E-, B-)

Hypothesis 7 invalidation. Hypothesis 7 would be invalidated if only one of hypotheses 1, 2 and 4 were not verified, and hypotheses 8 to 11 were not all verified. Hypotheses 3, 5, 6, and 12 do not require verification. Additionally, economic performance need not be achieved to verify hypothesis 7. Depending on whether economic performance is achieved and on the verification of hypotheses 1, 2, or 3, we can conclude regarding several types of performance: ideal, lagging, under pressure, and lack of performance.

Theoretical Use

Hypothesis 8

Reminder of hypothesis 8. The correlation between using the assessment technique and performance is stronger when the technique is used in self- and social-awareness.

Hypothesis 8 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 8 is verified if we can note the evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, of the following variables and indicators at the same time:

• Self and social awareness (A-)
• Uses in the six practical applications: organizational development, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical settings, and medium effect. (O-, L-, G-, S-, N-, D-)

The greater the use in organizational development, leadership, coaching, recruitment, and clinical settings, and the greater the medium effect, the stronger the self- and social awareness. The less the assessment technique is used in the six practical applications, the less self- and other-awareness it yields.

Hypothesis 8 invalidation. Using the assessment technique in the six practical applications without increasing the self and social awareness would invalidate hypothesis 8.

Hypothesis 9

Reminder of hypothesis 9. The uses of the assessment technique are all the stronger as its learning process is quasi-autonomous.

Hypothesis 9 validation: We can conclude that hypothesis 6 is verified if we can note the evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, of the following variables and indicators at the same time:

• Learning (F-)
• Stand-alone use in all six practical uses: organizational development, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical settings, and medium effect. (O-, L-, G-, S-, N-, D-)

The stronger the autonomous use of the assessment technique across the six practical applications, the stronger the learning. The less frequently the assessment technique is used across the six practical applications, the less learning there is. Hypothesis 9 invalidation. Using the assessment technique in the six practical applications without increasing learning would invalidate hypothesis 9.

Hypothesis 10

Reminder of hypothesis 10. The agreement between the use of the assessment technique and performance is more likely when the result as a language and signs is facilitated.

Hypothesis 10 validation. We can conclude that hypothesis 10 is verified if we can note an evolution in the same direction, positive or negative, of the following variables and indicators at the same time:

• Language and Signs (C-)
• Use in the six practical applications: organizational development, leadership, coaching, recruitment, clinical settings, and medium effect. (O-, L-, G-, S-, N-, D-)

The more extensive the use of the assessment technique across the six practical applications, the more its language and signs are used. The less use there is in teh sox practical applications, the less the technique’s language and signs are used.

Hypothesis 10 invalidation. Using the assessment technique within any of the six practical applications without increasing the use of language and signs would invalidate Hypothesis 10.

Antecedents of Use

Hypothesis 11

Reminder of hypothesis 11. The use of the assessment technique in learning is more likely when the technique and its business model from the publisher and consultant possess appropriate characteristics.

Hypothesis 11 validation. The hypothesis is validated when use levels in ‘Learning’ (F-) increase and the levels of the antecedent variables in 'Assessment Technique’ (T-) and 'Publisher and Consultant' (B-) are both high.

Hypothesis 11 invalidation. An increase in use in learning and low levels on the 'Assessment Technique' and 'Publisher and Consultant' variables would invalidate hypothesis 11. This indicates that learning in the assessment technique is strong and sustained over time, whereas neither the assessment technique nor the publisher/consultant business model has the appropriate characteristics for this.

Hypothesis 12

Reminder of the hypothesis 12. The use of the assessment technique is more likely when the environment and user have the appropriate characteristics.

Hypothesis 12 validation. Hypothesis 12 is validated when the use in ‘Organizational Development’ (O-), ‘Leadership’ (L-), Coaching (G-), Recruitment (S-), ‘Clinical Settings’ (N-) and ‘Medium Effect’ (D-) increases, and the levels of the antecedent variables 'Environment' (E-) and 'User'(U-) are both high.

Hypothesis 12 invalidation. An increase in the six practical applications and intermediate or low levels of the variables 'Environment' and 'User' would invalidate hypothesis 12. This implies that the environment and users lack the requisite characteristics to use the assessment technique, even though its use is increasing across all six applications.

Anticipated Conclusions

The following are the anticipated conclusions from applying the general framework to test the impact of an assessment technique on performance.

In companies where all antecedent variables are high, the uses should be strong, and performance should be “ideal”. Otherwise, one should find one of the three other cases of performance:

• Ideal performance. An increase in strategic and social performance. Economic performance is achieved.
• Lagging performance. A decrease in strategic performance and an increase in social performance. Economic performance is achieved.
• Performance under pressure. An increase in strategic performance and a decrease in social performance. Economic performance is achieved.
• Lack of performance. Decrease in strategic and social performance. Economic performance is not achieved.

While testing the hypothesis, it is necessary that the organization is not significantly affected by critical incidents, such as the loss of a major contract, a sudden leadership change, or the entry of a competitor during the observation period.

Partial use of assessment techniques, such as within a human resources department only, or for leadership only, should result in performance under pressure or lagging. In both cases, although the economic performance is achieved, it is less controlled than with the first ideal condition.

In cases of lagging performance, employees' social behaviors deviate from the medium-term strategic target, calling for a review of the strategic intent.

Under performance pressure, although strategic performance has increased and economic performance has been achieved, the decrease in engagement and the increase in adaptation call for strategic revision to ensure the organization continues to perform effectively.

Ideal performance reflects increases in both social and strategic performance, yielding positive economic outcomes and positioning the organization for future growth.