Research Paper: Use of Profiling Tools

Research Paper Assessment
Name: Balakrishna Shenoy Date: 23rd July 2012 Student ID: Balakrishna Shenoy Email: balakrishna.shenoy@db.com
Complete your 2000 word research paper and insert it in the space below. Then email this document as an attachment to assessment@icoachacademy.com
Effectiveness of Personality Assessment Tools and Its application in Coaching By Balakrishna Shenoy Word Count Body : Approximately 1900 words Cover Page, Appendix etc. Approximately 1000 words
Copyright 2006 International Coach Academy Pty. Ltd. Use is governed by the Terms and Conditions at http://www.icoachacademy.com Last updated Feb 2006
Table of Contents
1. Research Objective 2. Part 1- Research Summary a. Research Methodology Summary b. Research Findings Summary 3. Part 2 Relevance to Coaching a. Application in Coaching b. Recommended Use Cases for Coaching 4. Part 3 Research in Detail a. Research methodology b. Research Findings i. Awareness Section ii. Application and Use Section iii. Factors Influencing Effectiveness Section iv. Respondent Details Section 5. Works Cited 6. Appendix a. Questionnaire
Research Objective The use of psychometrics tools to assess personality types and traits is of recent origin and less than 150 years old. Francis Galton, often referred to as the father of psychometrics, pioneered the use of questionnaires. While the first psychometrics instruments were used to measure the concept of intelligence subsequently, one of the major focus area in psychometrics has been on personality testing. The objective of this research is to find out the effectiveness of such Personality Assessment Tools in the workplace and outside workplace, and its application in the coaching context i.e. how a coach can enhance the effective use of the Personality Assessment tools.
Part 1 Research Summary Research Methodology Summary An online survey was created and a total of 40 responses were recorded. The survey is divided into four parts. Part 1 - Awareness, Part 2 -Application and Use, Part 3- Factors Influencing Effectiveness and Part 4- Respondent details. Each of these is detailed later in this paper. Research Findings Summary Part 1 Awareness: The awareness about the personality assessment tools was widespread i.e., 100% of respondents were aware of at least one personality assessment tool out of which 87.5% of respondents knew more than one tool. The use of assessment tool was again widespread. 39 out of the 40 respondent had been assessed at least on one of the tools. From the 8 tools listed in the survey, MBTI was the most popular tool with 31 respondents having been assessed on this tool. DISC and Gallop or Clifton Strengths Finder came at second place with 16 respondents and
Tetramap stood third with 14 respondents having been assessed on the respective tool. Amongst these four tools, the Tetramap tool obtained a high score of 95% for practical relevance, and followed by the Gallop or Clifton Strengths Finder tool which obtained the second highest score of 75% for practical relevance.
Part 2 -Application and Use: This section had five statements and respondents who slightly agree or strongly agree with the statement are considered. For the statement I feel my self-awareness has improved, 35% of the respondents strongly agreed, and 58% slightly agreed. This indicates a mixed response to impact of the personality assessments on self awareness. To the statement I felt that the profile results reflected my personality fairly well, 28% of the respondents strongly agreed and 68% slightly agreed indicating a mixed response with regard to the reliability of the personality assessment tool result. To the statement I feel the tool helped me in dealing with interpersonal situations, 8% people strongly agreed and 68% slightly agreed. To the statement I have used the knowledge gained from the tools in my daily life at work, 15% strongly agreed and 58% slightly agreed. To the statement I have used the knowledge gained from the tools in my daily life at home and outside of work, 5% strongly agreed and 48% slightly agreed. The above three responses indicate a low level of practical application of the knowledge gained from the tool. There was a strong preference for use of the knowledge at workplace as compared to strong disagreements for statements on using the knowledge in interpersonal situations and outside of work situations. Part 3- Factors Influencing Effectiveness: This section had two statements I found the following factors influenced in a positive manner in the effective use of tool and I found the following factors influenced in a negative manner in the effective use of
tool. More than 50% of the respondents felt that personal debriefing and ease of use of the tool would positively influence the effectiveness of the tool. Exactly 50% of the respondents felt that Lack of follow through hampered effective use of the tool. Part 4 Respondent details: The respondent profile was predominantly male (80%), from banking and financial services industry (68%) with a significant set of respondents holding senior management positions (60%). Only 13% of the respondents were self employed or had own business or were free lance consultants.
Part 2 - Relevance To Coaching Application in Coaching The survey summary findings provide key insights and opportunities to the fraternity of Coaches. These insights and opportunities are limited to the respondent profile surveyed. The key insight here is that the administration of the personality assessment tool sans debriefing, follow through and guidance indicate low return on investment i.e. valuable resources spent (time and money) without obtaining the corresponding benefits in terms of knowledge being applied at work or home. It indicates the need for a structure that goes beyond mere administration of the personality test. A coach or mentor is best placed to create this structure. The relevance to coaching can be found in three aspects of coaching (a) Awareness creation (b) strong action orientation combined with accountability (c) debriefing where the coach is certified to administer the tool. The coach could partner with institutions who administer the test as a value added service. The coach could pitch directly to the corporate to market the support structure as a niche offering. The coach could as part of their existing engagement
provide the follow through, action orientation and accountability and significantly enhance the value derived from the personality assessment tools. These are elaborated further as use cases. Recommended Use cases for Coaching Case 1 Coach partners with the institution administering the personality tests and provides the support structure to the clients of the institution. Case 2 Coach pitches for specialized niche service of providing support structure for Corporates who are sponsors of personality tests for their employees. Case 3 As part of an existing client engagement: (a)The client is ready and keen to derive benefits of personality assessment profile results. Coach can provide action planning and accountability structures. Coach can provide guidance and debriefing if certified/qualified. (b) Client has specific issues and is ready to take a relevant personality assessment tool. Coach can recommend the relevant tool. Coach can provide action planning and accountability structures. Coach can provide guidance and debriefing if certified/qualified. (c) Client has shared personality assessment results. Coach can use the result to validate the conclusion reached based on other inputs received during the coaching engagement. Coach can provide action planning and accountability structures. Coach can provide guidance and debriefing if certified/qualified. In short, though there is a widespread use of personality assessment tool, there is a significant gap in terms of the utility of the tool in its impact. The coaching framework is a powerful framework that readily lends itself to improve the effectiveness of the use of the tool. Part 3 Research in Detail
Research Methodology A questionnaire was used as the sole instrument to gather the data. For this purpose, an online survey was created (see appendix for the questionnaire) and the link to the survey was sent out to more than 100 people via email. In addition, a few respondents were requested to fill up a paper copy of the online survey. These responses were manually added into the online tool. In total more than 125 persons were requested to participate in the survey during the period 27th Jun 2012 to 20th July 2012 and 40 responses were received. The survey respondents were selected from three main sources (a) LinkedIn network, (b) office network and (c) the ICA student network. On 20th July, the survey response was downloaded and data used in this paper. The questionnaire had the following sections: Awareness Application And Use Factors Contributing to effectiveness Respondent Details
The awareness section listed 8 personality assessment tools and an others column. This section had questions on awareness, use, recall and utility of the personality types listed. Multiple selections were allowed when responding to the question. The second section Application and Use had statements on reliability, improvement in self awareness, usefulness, and application of personality test tools. Responses were collected on a graded scale of 0 to 5, where zero stood for Dont Know/Cant Say, 1 stood for Strong Disagreement and 5 stood for strong agreement. The respondent is allowed to choose only one value. The third section was on factors that contributed to effective use of the personality test tools. This section listed a few factors and an others column. Respondents could choose multiple factors when
responding or add new factors not listed in the questionnaire. The first question was on factors that aided effectiveness and the second question was on factors that hindered the effectiveness. The final section was on the respondent detail. All questions were mandatory except the name and contact details.
Research Findings Awareness Section 100% of the respondents were aware of personality assessment tools and more than 99% have been assessed on at least one of the tool. Using assessment as a key criteria, four tools make up the three most popular tools. Please see the table below for the results against the four popular tools. Personality Assessment MBTI Tool Name Question on a. Awareness b. Assessed c. Recall of Profile Result (% of b) d. Practically Relevant (% of b) 68% 60% 75% 93% 93% 78% 81% 65% 40% 63% DISC Clifton Strengths Finder 53% 40% 69% 38% 35% 100% Tetramap
Considering the above data, MBTI is very popular with high recall value but scores third on practical relevance. DISC is second in both awareness and use, though scores lowest on recall and practical relevance. Clifton Strengths Finder scores third on awareness, second on use and scores higher on recall and practical relevance.
Tetramap scores fourth on awareness and use and it is the tool with highest recall and highest practical value. Application and Use Section
Application and Use- Profiling tools

I have used the knowledge gained from the tools in my daily life at home and outside of work. 5% 8% 35% 48% 5%
I have used the knowledge gained from the tools in my daily life at work
8%
20%
58%
15%
I feel that the tool helped me in dealing with interpersonal situations.
5% 5% 5%
15%
68%
8%
I feel that my self awareness improved. 3%
58%
35%
3% I felt that the profile results reflected my personality fairly well. 3% 68% 28%
0%
Don't Know/Cant Say Strongly Disagree
25%
Slightly disagree
50%
Slightly agree
75%
Strongly agree
100%
The second section on application and use consisted of 5 statements (as shown in the graph). Overall, taking strong agreement/disagreement to indicate definiteness, and slight agreement/disagreement to indicate tentativeness we see a bulk of respondents are tentative in their response. The range of tentative response (adding together both agreement and disagreement) is between 63% and 83% while definite response the range is 8% to 35%. Taking into account only the definite responses, we see that the awareness and reliability statements had strong agreements and no strong disagreements. The practical application statements on interpersonal situations and situations outside of work show close scores on both agreement and disagreement indicating that the use of personality assessment tools outside of workplace evokes strong sentiments and needs
10
to be used with greater care. However, the respondents seem to be more favorable using knowledge gained from personality assessment tool at work and there is no strong disagreement for this statement. The reason for this is unknown and would require further study. Factors Influencing Effectiveness section
The section on factors influencing effectiveness of the tools, a list of factors that had a positive or negative impact on the effectiveness of the personality test tools were explored. More than 50% of the respondents feel that a tool that is easy to use and oneon-one debriefing sessions would have helped improve effectiveness. Lack of follow through sessions and lack of one to one debriefing sessions come as the top two deterrent factors that impede the effectiveness.
Positively influencing Factors

Ease of use of the tool Individual one to one debriefing session Group De-briefing session Expertise of the person who administered the profile test Mentor Follow Through sessions Firm or Organisation wide use of the tool Executive or Life Coach 0% 10% 13% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 25% 30% 38% 38% 35% 53% 53%
11
Negatively influencing Factors

Lack of Follow Through sessions 50%
No one to one session
35%
Lack of Debriefing
30%
Tool was difficult to use or recollect Expertise of the person who administered the profile test 0%
20%
8% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Respondent Profile Section The respondent profile was predominantly male, from banking and financial services industry with a significant set of respondent holding senior management positions. Respondents - Gender profile RespondentsProfessional status
20% 80% 60%
2%25% 13%
Junior cadre Middle Management
Female Male
Self Employed/Own business/Free Lance
12
Respondents-Age profile
Respondents - Industry profile
3% 13% 22% 62%
3% 3% 26%
68%
25 to 35 years
35 to 50 years
Banking and Financial Services Human Resources and Training Related Coaching , Consulting
13
Works Cited Wikipedia Pages on : Psychometrics Personality Psychology
14
APPENDIX
15
Research On Use of Assessment Tools

Thank you for taking time out to fill up this survey. The purpose of this survey is to find out the effectiveness of people profile assessment tools and its application in the coaching context. Please rest assured the details will be kept confidential and only summary results will be published. If you wish receive the final report summary, please indicate the same in the appropriate column in the questionnaire below.
* Required
Awareness
I have heard about this tool * Please tick even if you just know but have not used the tool.
MBTI DISC BELBIN Tetramap Gallup or Clifton Strengths Finder Via Character Strengths Finder FIRO B IPNI Other:
I have been assessed on this tool * Please tick ONLY If you have taken an sefl assessment on this Tool.
16
I recall my profile type of my assessment * If you recall your profile type, then tick the box.
I find the following tools easy to use and of practical value. * Please tick ONLY If you have taken an sefl assessment on this Tool.
APPLICATION and USE

In this section, please answer the following questions keeping in mind the assessment tools you were administered. Please use the below as a guide 0 - Don't Know/ Can't Say. 1 - Strongly disagree 2 - Slightly disagree 3 - Slightly Agree 4 - Strongly agree
I felt that the profile results reflected my personality fairly well. * From the tools you have used and recall, please select an option that best describes your response.
0 1 2 3 4
17
Don't Know / Can't say
Strongly Agree
I feel that my self awareness improved. * From the tools you have used and recall, please select an option that best describes your response.
0 Don't Know / Can't Say 1 2 3 4 Strongly Agree
I feel that the tool helped me in dealing with interpersonal situations. * From the tools you have used and recall, please select an option that best describes your response.
0 Don't Know/Can't Say 1 2 3 4 Strongly Agree
I have used the knowledge gained from the tools in my daily life at work * From the tools you have used and recall, please select an option that best describes your response.
I have used the knowledge gained from the tools in my daily life at home and outside of work. * From the tools you have used and recall, please select an option that best describes your response.
Factors contributing to Effectiveness

In this section, please list down the factors that you felt helped you use the tools effectively and factors that hindered the use.
I found the following factors influenced in a positive manner in the effective use of the tool Tick as many as you feel that have actually helped you. Please remember this question needs to be answered with regard to the use of the profiling tool.
Group De-briefing session Individual one to one debriefing session

18
Executive or Life Coach Mentor Follow Through sessions Firm or Organisation wide use of the tool Ease of use of the tool Expertise of the person who administered the profile test Other:
I found the following factors influenced in a Negative manner in the effective use of the tool Tick as many as you feel that have actually helped you. Please remember this question needs to be answered with regard to the use of the profiling tool.
Lack of Debriefing No one to one session Expertise of the person who administered the profile test Lack of Follow Through sessions Tool was difficult to use or recollect Other:
RESPONDENT DETAILS
This is the last part of the survey and we need a few details about yourself. I thank you once again for your valuable input.
Your Gender
Male Female
Your Age Group
Below 18 years 18 to 24 years 25 to 35 years 35 to 50 years 50 to 60 years

19
above 60 years
Please specify your professional status
CxO level Senior Management (VP, Director, Managing Director, Partner, General Manager etc.,) Middle Management Junior cadre Self Employed/Own business/Free Lance Other:
Please specific your Industry
Human Resources and Training Related Banking and Financial Services Manufacturing and Core Industry Other:
Your name (Optional)
Should you wish to receive this report please fill in your email id The report should be ready in about 6 to 8 weeks time - by mid to end Aug 2012
0
Submit
Powered by Google Docs Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Additional Terms
20

Research Paper: Use of Profiling Tools

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Paper: Use of Profiling Tools

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Paper Assessment

Application and Use- Profiling tools

I feel that the tool helped me in dealing with interpersonal situations.

I feel that my self awareness improved. 3%

Positively influencing Factors

Negatively influencing Factors

No one to one session

8% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

20% 80% 60%

Junior cadre Middle Management

Self Employed/Own business/Free Lance

Respondents - Industry profile

3% 13% 22% 62%

Works Cited Wikipedia Pages on : Psychometrics Personality Psychology

Research On Use of Assessment Tools

APPLICATION and USE

Don't Know / Can't say

Factors contributing to Effectiveness

Group De-briefing session Individual one to one debriefing session

Your Age Group

Below 18 years 18 to 24 years 25 to 35 years 35 to 50 years 50 to 60 years

Please specify your professional status

Please specific your Industry

Your name (Optional)

Powered by Google Docs Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Additional Terms

You might also like