Profilematch 360coachingsupplement simon sample 947

® Profile:Match2

P:M360™ Coaching Supplement

by Psychological Consultancy Ltd. ABC MANAGEMENT LTD

Sophie Sample

[1026-1685][20141023113553EC1924wg][23/10/2014 11:40:26]

To be used alongside Sophie Sample's P:M360™ Feedback Report

© Psychological Consultancy Limited 8 Mount Ephraim, Tunbridge Wells, TN4 8AS Telephone: 01892 559 540

® Profile:Match2

Introduction

Contents Introduction P:M360™ Coaching Supplement

2

How to use this supplement

3

Personality Summary Report Personality profile

4

Performance vs Potential Performance vs Potential

5

Accounting for performance/potential differences

6

Competency Analysis Persuasive Communication

7

Decision Making

10

Problem Solving

13

Strategic Awareness

16

Interpersonal Skills

19

Analytic

22

Attention to Detail

25

Information Management

28

Commitment

31

Resilience

34

Development Resources Checklist Development resources checklist

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

37

PAGE 1

® Profile:Match2

Introduction

P:M360™ Coaching Supplement

This P:M360™ Coaching Supplement provides an additional resource for the personal development of the assessee, offering deeper insights into the extensive pool of information generated by the P:M360™ system. It should be used by the coach or manager alongside the corresponding P:M360™ Feedback Report.

Although the conceptual framework for P:M360™ is broadly similar to other 360° instruments, it has unique features derived from the nature of the PROFILE:MATCH™ system. This uses competency metric principles to translate personality data into competency ratings; so, although everything is framed in the everyday language of competencies, the measurement is rigorous.

The estimate of 'potential' for each competency derives directly from high quality Five Factor Model (FFM) personality assessment.

Both the potential and the performance ratings provide standardised, norm-referenced comparisons. This adds strength and objectivity to the ratings and scores reported and to their distributions and comparability.

PERSONALITY AND PERFORMANCE The relationship between personality and job performance is fundamental to the rationale of PROFILE:MATCH™. Personality influences career success because different roles make different personality-based demands on their incumbents. While some jobs emphasise sociability, in others success relies on being able to work in isolation; some emphasise detail and accurancy while others require a 'big picture' approach; and so on. Over time, the pervasive influence of any deeply rooted aspects of an individual's temperament will influence their enthusiasm, commitment and consistency of performance; their effectiveness and their continuing success.

Within P:M360™, the assessee's PROFILE:MATCH™ results provide a measure of potential for each competence being examined. This reflects the extent to which their personality will either contribute to performance or interfere with it. These personality-based estimates of potential provide the backdrop for the 360° ratings of performance completed by the various groups of assessors: the managers, peers, clients and direct reports, and by the assessees themselves.

PERSONAILTY AND COMPETENCE Personality assessments have been demonstrated by extensive research to reflect five key underlying factors; the Five Factor Model (FFM). These provide a simplified structure that underpins personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives.

Analagous to the primary colours that underpin all the tones and hues that enhance our visual world, the 'primary colours' of personality can be grouped in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the actual diversity and complexity of personality.

Within PROFILE:MATCH™, mathematical algorithms are used to reconstruct the complexities of personality from the primary factors. Personality scale scores are transformed according to the requirements for each competency, and re-combined in proportion to their importance.

THE PERSONALITY PROFILE For the coach, the starting point will be the complete personality profile that will provide a comprehensive overview of the assessee's pattern of characteristics. Then, at a more detailed level throughout this Coaching Supplement, clear illustrations describe the particular contribution of personality scale to that competency rating. This offers a coach or manager a clear insight into the relationship between personality and competence, facilitating their effective exploration with the assessee.

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 2

® Profile:Match2

Introduction

How to use this supplement

This supplement is used alongside the corresponding P:M360™ Feedback Report and the sequence is the same for both documents. Part numbers used in both sections below all relate to those in the assessee's Feedback Report.

PLEASE BE AWARE THAT COACHING SUPPLEMENT CONTENT IS PROVIDED IN CONFIDENCE TO PROTECT THE ANONIMITY OF RATERS AND THE CONFIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE COACHING PROCESS.

FEEDBACK REPORT CONTENT Part 1 - Comparing assessor ratings Performance ratings from each group of assessors are graphically presented along with an aggregate of all assessor ratings.

Any significant differences are highlighted.

Part 2 - Performance vs potential This section considers differences between the various ratings of performance and the potential for each competency as estimated by self-report assessment.

Part 3 - Competency analysis This is the heart of the report; for each competency in turn, it shows the assessee's results from the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment and the P:M360™ rating process. Details of the most and least endorsed items for each rater group are provided.

Part 4 - Planning development This section guides decisions about personal development and giving advice about setting realistic and practical development objectives.

COACHING SUPPLEMENT CONTENT Personality profile (additional) An overview of the assessee's personality (not included in the Feedback Report).

Part 2 - Performance vs potential This page summarises all the assessors performance ratings against the backdrop of potential.

Part 3 - Competency analysis (additional) These pages describe the individuals position on each competency, as well as their score on each contributing personality scale.

Item level responses (additional) Individual rater responses are provided for each performance rating item.

Responses to open ended questions (optional and additional) If completed, verbatim responses from each rater are presented in full in this document only.

Rater comments (additional) A summary of all open ended question responses for each competency plus any final extra questions on overall performance.

Part 4 - Planning development An extended version of the Development Resources Checklist is provided for the coach. ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 3

® Profile:Match2

Sophie Sample

PROFILE 1: Sophie Sample's personality profile Your temperament

CONSCIENTIOUSNESS

AGREEABILITY

EXTRAVERSION

ADJUSTMENT

SCALE

SELF-ESTEEM

COMPOSURE

SOCIABILITY

ASSERTIVENESS

SENSITIVITY

ACCOMMODATION

COMPLIANCE

PERFECTIONISM

OPENNESS

IMAGINATION

STUDIOUSNESS

T SCORE

LOW MEANING

44

Apprehensive Self-doubting Self-conscious Self-critical Worrying Anxious

73

Intense Irritable Moody Passionate Emotional Turbulent

27

Inhibited Reserved Reticent Solitary Socially anxious Uncommunicative

34

Reserved Leisurely Uncompetetive Not goal focused Relaxed about status Unassuming

50

Exacting Aloof Task focused Tough minded Unsentimental Critical

56

Independent Self-sufficient Forthright Uncompromising Impartial Individualistic

65

Unpredictable Challenging Impulsive Capricious Spontaneous Risk taking

34

Casual Unsystematic Impatient with detail Flexible Proportionate Undisciplined

43

Realistic Practical Unquestioning Down-to-earth Not easily bored Pragmatic

38

Experimental Resists being taught Learns by doing Approximate Learns the necessities Faith in experience

STENS 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

HIGH MEANING Confident Self-assured Upbeat Trusting Optimistic Bold

4

10

Composed Serene Stress-tolerant Steady Unemotional Imperturbable Demonstrative Outgoing Talkative Gregarious Socially confident Seeks the limelight

1

Determined Driven Eager to take charge Keen to impress Energetic Ambitious

2

Caring Convivial People focused Sympathetic Warm Friendly

6

Communal Needy Averse to conflict Eager to fit in Uncritical Inter-dependent

7

8

Conforming Rule abiding Dutiful Tractable Cooperative Risk-averse Systematic Organised Detail conscious Inflexible Fussy Compulsive

2

4

3

Conceptual Curious Innovative Big picture orientated Analytical Distractible Factual Learning for pleasure Knowledgeable Widely informed Well prepared Faith in information

Validity of these results Sophie Sample's pattern of item responses is particularly unusual and may be due to careless or inattentive responding. You should bear this in mind when interpreting this report.

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 4

® Performance vs Potential

Profile:Match2

Performance vs Potential

10 9 8 7

7

6

7

6

5 4

7 6

5

5

5

4

3

3

2 1 PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION

DECISION MAKING

PROBLEM SOLVING

STRATEGIC AWARENESS

INTERPERSONAL SKILLS

ANALYTIC

ATTENTION TO DETAIL

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

COMMITMENT

Assessees make two contributions to this assessment. Firstly, they completed the self-report PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire which produced estimates of potential for each competency. These show the extent to which personality is likely to facilitate or interfere with that competency and are represented by the background 'blocks' in the diagram. Secondly, they completed the questions rating their own performance on each competency

RESILIENCE

Self Manager Peer Direct Report

A lot of information is packed into the graphic above. All the ratings and responses of the various participants are summarised here, giving the coach a graphic overview of the assessee's position with regard to each competency; their personality characteristics and their significance in terms of potential benefit or detrimental effect on performance. The average performance rating for each competency by each group of assessors, and the extent to which these various metrics agree or disagree with each other and with self-ratings of performance are also provided.

How to use this information Compare the estimates of potential (background blocks) with the various ratings of performance for each competency (graph lines).

To what extent are the variations in potential paralleled by the patterns of performance ratings?

Identify under-performance and unexpectedly high performances. The framework on the next page is designed to consider possible explanations for any of these discrepancies between performance vs potential Consider the different assessor group ratings. Where are there discrepancies? Where is there consensus and convergence of view? Are there some discrepancies that particularly stand out?

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 5

® Profile:Match2

Performance vs Potential

Accounting for performance/potential differences

Differences between performance and potential are fruitful areas for development. Whether your assessee has higher ratings for one or the other is likely to reflect the balance between natural talent and experiences, contexts or situations that enhance performance.

Performance rated lower than potential Where estimates of potential are higher than ratings for performance it seems that the assessee's personality characteristics are not providing the advantage expected in relation to that competence. There are many possible explanations for this and the assessee may be in a position to consider why this may be happening. The following questions can be used to explore four different scenarios as a springboard for wider discussions. (a) Is it situational? Are opportunities to shine in this area blocked by other more pressing priorities (the assessee's or the company's), or by others who control that territory due to talent or seniority? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (b) Is it motivational? Are there other factors operating to suppress their motivation or desire to succeed in these areas (low employee engagement, lack of ambition, work tensions or other worries)? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (c) Although their temperament may be ideal, do their skills and knowledge compare unfavourably with other colleagues or with the norm for the organisation? Could it be that they need to work to improve performance and to make themselves a viable player in this area? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (d) Are they simply unaware of their talents and their potential to enhance their performance? Perhaps, like many other people, they are taking their exceptional qualities for granted, viewing them as ordinary or of no particular interest because they are so familiar? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] Performance rated higher than potential In this scenario, it may appear that the assessee is out-performing their abilities and while this may seem paradoxical it is perfectly possible. Within a coaching or feedback situation, the following questions can be used to explore four possible explanations for this. (a) Might they be delivering on that competency, but only as it applies to a specific situation? Is this situation particularly supportive to them in this respect and therefore flatters their performance? Have they built up their effectiveness bit by bit over a period of time? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (b) Are they very self-aware, alert to their shortcomings and able to manage them well? Does their self-knowledge help to restrain less productive behaviours or alert them to the need to find alternative strategies in order to be more effective than they would otherwise be? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (c) Is their performance flattered by the relatively poor performance of others? In 360° assessments, they are viewed in the context of local culture and expectations. Ratings will reflect this and, to an extent, they are more relative than absolute. [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (d) Are they highly ambitious and determined to make the best of every opportunity? Are they so competetive that they work hard to raise their game? May their performance ratings be influenced by the fact that they are energetic, hard working or high profile? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ]

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 6

® Competency Analysis

Profile:Match2

Persuasive Communication - personality components

This competency is concerned with the ability to express oneself well, to influence others and to negotiate effectively. Such people should be articulate and express ideas with clarity as well as having the insight to appreciate the likely impact of different presentation styles on others. High scorers on this competency will be determined to persuade and be able to articulate their viewpoint coherently and convincingly. They will also be attuned to the reactions of an audience and be flexible in adapting to the needs of the moment.

4

Persuasive Communication

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Assertiveness

34

Being goal focused, persistent and keen to impress but appreciating when to hold back and rein it in.

11

30%

Sociability

27

Being socially skilled comfortable talking to people or groups and being in the lime-light.

7

25%

Imaginative

43

Having the agility to deal with unexpected arguments 'on the fly', but not so imaginative as to seem 12 implausible.

25%

Sensitivity

50

Being sufficiently receptive and attuned to others to appreciate their situation and to 'read' their reactions.

15

20%

45

4

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 7

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Persuasive Communication - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Communicates openly and easily with people at all levels and from any background

0

0

0

3

2

4

4.11

Makes an audience feel that they are appreciated and understood

0

0

0

1

8

0

3.89

Takes every opportunity to promote the company, its products and services

0

0

3

2

2

2

3.33

Comfortable to deliver presentations with minimal preparation

0

0

1

5

3

0

3.22

Very effective in getting others to accept proposals, ideas and points of view 0

1

0

4

4

0

3.22

Accommodates other people rather than pushing for own preferred outcomes

0

0

3

3

3

0

3.00

Uncomfortable about seeming too pushy

0

3

1

3

2

0

2.44

Needs to prepare carefully and in detail in order to communicate effectively

0

2

4

2

1

0

2.22

Reluctant to take on client facing roles other than on an occasional basis

1

2

4

1

0

1

2.00

Seems tough minded and oblivious to the frailties of human nature

1

4

4

0

0

0

1.33

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 8

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Decision Making - personality components

This competency is concerned with achieving the right balance between indecisiveness and taking unnecessary risk. Decision makers need to be resourceful and confident in their own abilities so that they are able to deal calmly with problems, choices and uncertainty. They need to ensure that they are adequately informed on all the issues and to be rational in their judgements. In the case of strategic decisions, they will also need the vision and big picture perspective to see the issues in the wider context.

6

Decision Making

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Imaginative

43

Ability to conceive alternative solutions and to envision the consequences - but not so full of ideas as to seem indecisive.

10

20%

Studiousness

38

Desire for facts rather than opinions or hunches - but not to the extent that it delays decisions.

8

20%

Self-esteem

44

Having the confidence and optimism to make decisions, to express that view and not be easily overwhelmed by others.

10

20%

Compliance

65

Accepting an agenda for decision making that reflects the values, objectives and culture within which decisions are being made.

9

20%

Rationality

73

Being logical and objective rather than relying too much on 'gut feeling' and intuition.

15

20%

52

6

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 9

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Decision Making - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Is confident, decisive and sure of themself

0

0

0

3

5

1

3.78

Researches issues thoroughly before making decisions

0

0

2

0

5

2

3.78

Can work things through logically and weed out weak arguments

0

0

0

3

5

1

3.78

Their decisions are widely respected and reinforce company values

0

0

0

5

4

0

3.44

Always excited by new ideas and different viewpoints

0

0

0

6

2

1

3.44

Relies on own intuition rather than gathering all possible information

0

3

4

2

0

0

1.89

It can sometimes be difficult to see the logic of their viewpoint

0

5

1

3

0

0

1.78

Can appear dismissive of other contributions to the decision making process 0

8

1

0

0

0

1.11

Has so many new ideas that it delays decision making

2

4

3

0

0

0

1.11

Shows little regard for the culture of the company when making decisions

4

4

1

0

0

0

0.67

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 10

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Problem Solving - personality components

This competency is concerned with delivering effective solutions and having a good practical understanding of issues. High scorers will be imaginative and open to a wide range of ideas and influences and will consider both traditional and innovative options before committing to a solution. They should also be driven and concerned to quickly and successfully resolve any problems for which they have taken responsibility. Finally, high scorers should also have the confidence and self-belief to implement their ideas or put them forward for others to do so.

5

Problem Solving

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Imaginative

43

Being curious, having lots of ideas and being flexible - but not to the extent of seeming impractical or eccentric.

20

40%

Self-esteem

44

Having the confidence to approach problems with optimism and self-belief.

16

30%

Assertiveness

34

Being concerned to keep the problem solving process on track for a successful resolution.

11

30%

47

5

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 11

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Problem Solving - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Has an optimistic, ‘can do’ attitude to problem solving

0

0

0

2

6

1

3.89

Perseveres until the root cause of a problem is identified and a solution found

0

0

0

3

5

1

3.78

Will consider a number of options before committing to a solution

0

0

1

4

3

1

3.44

Able to suggest original ideas and novel solutions

0

0

0

5

4

0

3.44

Considers the wider situation beyond the specific problem presented

0

0

1

3

5

0

3.44

When faced with a problem will only consider conventional solutions

2

2

2

3

0

0

1.67

Has lots of ideas, but often they are eccentric and impractical

2

3

2

0

2

0

1.67

Overestimates their own contribution when dealing with problems

0

4

4

1

0

0

1.67

Easily discouraged when things go wrong

1

7

1

0

0

0

1.00

Doesn't take responsibility for problems arising on their patch

4

4

1

0

0

0

0.67

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 12

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Strategic Awareness - personality components

This competency is concerned with the benefits of a rational appraisal of events within their wider context. High ratings on this competency also suggest an ability to appreciate an organisation's strategic advantages and disadvantages as well as recognising what has to be dealt with in order to achieve objectives. Such people will be rational and have a preference for evidence over opinion. They will appreciate the wider implications of their decisions, both within and beyond the organisation as well as anticipating future developments.

7

Strategic Awareness

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Imaginative

43

Ability to view things from a variety of perspectives and to conceive the likely pros and cons - but not to the extent of seeming indecisive.

18

40%

Rationality

73

Being logical and objective rather than relying too much on 'gut feeling' and intuition.

29

40%

Compliance

65

Respecting the values, objectives and culture of the organisation as a framework for their strategic thinking.

10

20%

57

7

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 13

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Strategic Awareness - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Alert to anything that threatens the organisation’s strategies or objectives

0

0

0

0

7

2

4.22

Critically considers the assumptions and rationale behind any proposed policies

0

0

1

3

4

1

3.56

Develops strategies that take account of external changes and developments

0

0

0

6

1

2

3.56

Identifies the hurdles and hazards blocking organisational objectives

0

1

0

5

3

0

3.11

Has a clear preference for evidence over opinion or intuition

0

0

2

4

3

0

3.11

Easily isolates the essential issues when planning

0

0

4

2

3

0

2.89

Plans and strategies reflect short term thinking only

1

3

4

1

0

0

1.56

Desire to preserve traditional approaches inhibits more future proof strategies

0

7

0

2

0

0

1.44

Doesn’t support decisions with any clear rationale

3

3

3

0

0

0

1.00

Alarms others with radical and unconventional proposals

4

3

2

0

0

0

0.78

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 14

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Interpersonal Skills - personality components

This competency is concerned with the chemistry of interpersonal relationships and an awareness of the way that one comes across to others. It involves interpersonal sensitivity and the ability to appreciate another person's motivational and emotional needs. Whether as a leader, a colleague or a subordinate, high scorers on this competency are likely to develop effective working relationships with others both within and beyond their own area of responsibility. They will also be concerned to maintain harmonious relationships and to defuse conflict.

5

Interpersonal Skills

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Sensitivity

50

Ability to convey an interest and concern in others and to seem empathic about their interests and concerns.

14

25%

Sociability

27

Outgoing, sociable and comfortable being centre of attention, but also having the restraint to ask questions and listen.

7

25%

Assertiveness

34

Being purposeful, ambitious and keen to accept responsibility but without being ruthless.

9

25%

Accommodation

56

Being neither too outspoken and independent nor too restrained by a desire to please everyone.

17

25%

47

5

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 15

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Interpersonal Skills - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Prepared to listen to other opinions without being too anxious to agree

0

0

0

4

4

1

3.67

Proactive about building effective working relationships

0

0

0

5

4

0

3.44

Is outgoing, gregarious and attracted by opportunities to engage with others 1

0

0

4

3

1

3.22

Shows understanding of others’ motivations and perspectives

0

1

0

4

4

0

3.22

Is an assertive person who makes their presence felt

0

0

2

4

3

0

3.11

Avoids upsetting others with critical or contentious views

0

3

0

5

1

0

2.44

Tends not to initiate interaction with others except when necessary

2

2

2

1

2

0

1.89

Seems unaware of the impact of their behaviour on other people

2

3

2

0

2

0

1.67

Unconcerned about other peoples' opinions

1

4

3

0

1

0

1.56

Can be overbearing and inclined to impose on the personal space of others

7

2

0

0

0

0

0.22

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 16

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Analytic - personality components

Concerned with having a systematic and considered problem solving style, this competency requires a rational and logical approach to organisational issues. Such people will be wary of superficial conclusions and will want to base decisions on a thorough examination of all relevant information. The ideal candidate will be able to critically evaluate information from various sources and to question the efficacy of different proposals or solutions. They will have a critical and analytical approach coupled with a sound knowledge base and a big picture orientation.

7

Analytic

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Rationality

73

Being logical and objective rather than relying too much on 'gut feeling' and intuition

29

40%

Imaginative

43

Having the ability to think beyond the immediate issues, taking the bigger picture into account - but 14 not to the extent of seeming obscure or impractical.

30%

Studiousness

38

Having a preference for facts and information over opinions and a desire to get to the bottom of things, but without loosing sight of objectives.

12

30%

55

7

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 17

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Analytic - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Adopts an evidence based approach to issues

0

0

0

3

4

2

3.89

Easily generates and debates ‘what if’ scenarios

0

1

0

2

6

0

3.44

Approaches things in a detached and logical way

0

0

0

7

2

0

3.22

Able to view the bigger picture, taking analysis beyond the immediate situation

1

0

1

2

5

0

3.11

Probes the proposals of others to find the weakness of their argument

0

1

2

4

1

1

2.89

Readily expresses opinions on subjects they know little about

0

4

1

4

0

0

2.00

Relies mostly on personal judgement rather than systematic analysis

0

3

4

2

0

0

1.89

Bases conclusions on opinion rather than logical evaluation of facts and data 1

1

6

1

0

0

1.78

Judgements can often be influenced non-rational considerations

1

4

3

1

0

0

1.44

Accepts explanations without asking questions or probing in depth

0

5

4

0

0

0

1.44

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 18

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Attention to Detail - personality components

This competency is concerned with being attentive to detail in the planning and the execution of tasks. Individuals who are a good fit with this competency take great care with tasks and have a respect for craftsmanship, for doing things properly and for complying with policies and procedures. They have a single-minded focus on the task in hand and would be quick to spot errors and inconsistencies. Their high standards are rooted in a desire for order and for perfection, and a deep concern to avoid error.

5

Attention to Detail

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Perfectionism

34

Thorough, conscientious and concerned about detail - anxious to follow procedures and to do things 'by the book'.

17

50%

Compliance

65

Anxious to meet expectations and to act in accordance with organisational objectives and values.

20

30%

Imaginative

43

Having a tendency to become bored by repetitive or routing tasks and to focus on the bigger picture rather than the detail

11

20%

48

5

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 19

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Attention to Detail - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Perseveres with repetitive or routine elements of work

0

0

0

3

3

3

4.00

Attentive to detail in the planning and execution of tasks

0

0

0

3

3

3

4.00

Shows a high degree of concern for accuracy

0

0

0

1

7

1

4.00

Conforms with established procedures and does things by the book

0

0

1

4

3

1

3.44

Deeply concerned about making mistakes

0

1

2

2

3

1

3.11

Focuses on the bigger picture rather than on task details

0

0

3

4

2

0

2.89

Is individualistic and seems unconcerned about disapproval

1

1

4

3

0

0

2.00

Is casual and unstructured in their approach

2

1

3

2

1

0

1.89

Sometimes seems careless and disorganised

4

3

0

1

1

0

1.11

Is impulsive, spontaneous and unpredictable

3

4

2

0

0

0

0.89

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 20

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Information Management - personality components

This competency concerns a respect for knowledge and being disposed to research issues; discovering the available facts before making decisions. Such people are organised and take pleasure in learning and value education for its own sake. They should readily assimilate and organise information and be disposed to keep up-to-date with their areas of expertise. They will typically make effective use of knowledge from a wide range of information sources on a day-to-day basis. Such people will be achievement oriented and purposeful in applying knowledge to work situations.

3

Information Management

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Studiousness

38

Having a passion for learning, for facts and for information.

19

50%

Assertiveness

34

Being purposeful and persistent and showing initiative and taking responsibility.

9

25%

Perfectionism

34

Highly organised, conscientious and concerned about detail and high standards.

10

25%

38

3

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 21

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Information Management - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Will get to the bottom of things, even if they have limited knowledge themselves

0

0

1

2

4

2

3.78

An advocate of continuous professional development

0

0

0

4

4

1

3.67

Shows respect for knowledge and factual information

0

0

0

4

4

1

3.67

Goes about keeping informed in a planned and systematic way

0

0

1

5

2

1

3.33

Always on the look out for information that will enhance products and services

0

0

3

4

0

2

3.11

Seems to prefer learning by experience rather than being taught or trained

0

3

3

1

2

0

2.22

Unconcerned whether they seem informed or knowledgeable

0

4

3

1

1

0

1.89

Overlooks new developments in their own area of expertise

1

5

3

0

0

0

1.22

Avoids challenges that require extending one’s knowledge base

2

3

4

0

0

0

1.22

Doesn’t investigate work related issues in any organised way

2

6

1

0

0

0

0.89

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 22

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Commitment - personality components

This competency is concerned with the readiness to identify with the objectives and values of an organisation, to be an energetic and ambitious employee who works to high standards and does things 'by the book'. High ratings distinguish those looking for deeper involvement in their job than those who view it as a simple 'work for hire' arrangement. Such people like to feel that they belong and are ready to make a commitment. Implicit in this will be an expectation that, in their turn, they will be valued and respected by the employing organisation.

6

Commitment

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Compliance

65

Being committed to the values, objectives and culture of the organisation.

33

50%

Perfectionism

34

Having a preference for doing things 'by the book', being organised and following procedures.

9

25%

Assertiveness

34

Having the desire to make a difference and being purposeful and ambitious for the organisation.

9

25%

51

6

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 23

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Commitment - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Works hard to fulfill company expectations

0

0

0

1

5

3

4.22

Is determined to make a success of things

0

0

0

2

3

4

4.22

Works hard to deliver on time and to the required specification

0

0

0

2

5

2

4.00

Concerned to do everything to a consistently high standard

0

0

0

5

2

2

3.67

Defends and lives by company decisions, even when they are unpopular

0

0

2

1

4

2

3.67

Takes part in all aspects of organisational life

0

0

2

5

1

1

3.11

Fulfils contractual requirements, but without giving additional time and energy

0

4

2

1

2

0

2.11

Takes a leisurely, unhurried approach to task completion

0

4

2

2

1

0

2.00

Content if work is satisfactory rather than aspiring to perfection

1

1

5

2

0

0

1.89

Views being dutiful as compromising one's individuality

2

4

3

0

0

0

1.11

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 24

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Resilience - personality components

This competency is concerned with coping with stress and remaining calm under pressure. High scorers will be confident and sure of themselves, without seeming arrogant. They will be neither moody nor inclined to take things personally and will discuss contrary views without taking offence. Such people are calm, self-confident and optimistic and have the personal autonomy to deal with issues (including criticism, conflict or abuse) without over-reacting. Such people are appreciated for their stability and their consistency of mood.

7

Resilience

COMPETENCY METRICS - UNPACKING THE COMPETENCY STEN SCORE Personality assessments focus on underlying structure; the 'primary colours' of personality. These are the factors that underpin personality as we actually experience it in our daily lives. These 'primary colours' can be recombined in an infinite number of combinations to recreate the diversity and complexity of personality as we know it.

PROFILE:MATCH™ uses mathematical algorithms to transform personality scale scores according to the requirements for each competency. It then combines each of these contributions in proportion to their importance.

The table below explains how PROFILE:MATCH™ has transformed the candidate's scores on each personality scale (T1) into a rating for this specific competency (T2). The final column shows the weighting then given to each of these personality scales in calculating the final sten score for this competency.

Contributing Scale

T1

The Impact

T2

Weight

Composure

73

Able to deal well with pressure and to handle disappointments or unexpected events well.

37

50%

Self-esteem

44

Being sure of one's self; trusting, confident, optimistic and untroubled by self-doubts.

22

50%

59

7

WEIGHTED T2 - STEN

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 25

® Profile:Match2

Competency Analysis

Resilience - item responses

The table below provides a breakdown of Sophie Sample's P:M360™ rater responses for each question on the survey. Within each competency performance statements have been rank ordered from the highest to the lowest score. Higher scores in the Mean column suggest that the statement is more descriptive of the assessee than a lower score.

Content

Response Frequencies 0

1

2

3

4

5

Mean

Able to debate their proposals without becoming defensive

0

0

1

0

3

5

4.33

Accepts challenges, expressing confidence in own ability to meet them

0

0

0

2

5

2

4.00

Addresses difficult issues, such as conflict or personal attack, calmly

0

0

0

2

5

2

4.00

Maintains effectiveness during periods of high pressure

0

0

0

5

2

2

3.67

Their trust and optimism inspires self-belief in others

0

0

0

4

5

0

3.56

Has every expectation that others will respond to them in a positive way

0

0

2

4

2

1

3.22

Is self critical and succumbs to their own doubts about a positive outcome

0

1

6

1

1

0

2.22

Loses composure if disturbed by unexpected setbacks

1

5

1

2

0

0

1.44

Allows events or the behaviour of others to undermine their confidence

2

5

2

0

0

0

1.00

Can be irritable, unpredictable and difficult for others to deal with

8

1

0

0

0

0

0.11

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 26

® Profile:Match2

Development

Development resources checklist

This checklist summarises the resource material available from this P:M360™ assessment to inform coaching strategies and thoughts about future personal development. A version of this checklist is included in the assessee's P:M360™ Feedback Report.

PART 1 - variability amongst raters Self-ratings of performance and ratings by each rater group - where are the biggest discrepancies between the assessee's ratings of their own performance and the perceptions of others? Remember, these are averaged over the entire group of raters.

Discrepancies between performance ratings - do the groups rate the assessee differently? If they do, this is something you will want to explore in feedback or coaching.

Consistency of performance ratings - do people within the same rater group rate the assessee differently? The more consistent they are, the more likely it is that this represents their typical pattern of behaviour.

The range of performance ratings. How extreme are the variations of ratings within each group? Do raters use the full range of response options available?

PART 2 - potential vs performance Does the assessee perform best on the competencies where they have been assessed as having the greatest potential? Are there competencies on which they perform better than their rating of potential might lead one to expect? Are they exploiting their potential to full effect?

PART 3 - each competency in depth Full competency definitions. These remind you exactly what was assessed.

Competency ratings. These are indices of potential; to what extent does the assessee's temperament assist or hinder them with this competency.

Passages of descriptive text. Each passage looks at different aspects of temperament that contributes to that competency; which are their strongest/weakest points?

Points for assessees to reflect on. These points address issues raised by the assessee's most problematic responses. They will be more relevant to some people than others, but highlight something that does need to be addressed in feedback or coaching.

Discrepancy analyses. These highlight any significant differences between groups of raters. The assessee should consider why they might be viewed differently by different groups.

Most and least endorsed items. This analysis shows which items the raters felt were most and least descriptive of this assessee.

Do peers and direct reports agree?

Part 3+ (additional coaching material) Personality and competency potential. A breakdown of the personality elements contributing to each competency.

Performance Rating Responses. The fine detail of all rater responses relating to each competency.

Open ended questions (optional). The verbatim responses of all raters relating to each competency.

General extra questions (optional). The verbatim responses of all raters.

©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 27