Profilematch 360feedbackreport simon sample 947

® Profile:Match2

P:M360™ Feedback Report

by Psychological Consultancy Ltd. ABC MANAGEMENT LTD

Sophie Sample

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

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

® Profile:Match2

Preface

About P:M360™ In this approach, an individual's self ratings are compared to behavioural ratings by others that they interact with at work: their line manager, their peers, direct report, customers or clients. This all round perspective provides a particularly robust assessment, and a sound basis for reviews, appraisals and particularly for personal development. PROFILE:MATCH™ 360° assessments are based either on the key selected competencies for a role or, taking a broader approach, on a generic set of widely appreciated work related competencies.

As the candidate for this assessment, you will have completed two questionnaires. This report is based on your responses to these questionnaires, together with results from questionnaires completed by your various assessors.

The first questionnaire you completed was concerned with your competency potential, the extent to which your personality is either an enabling factor in relation to each competency or something that will tend to interfere with performance. This psychometric self-report questionnaire was completed only by you. Its purpose is to provide a comparison between your potential and your performance, a perspective that can make an important contribution to the eventual outcome of the 360° process in terms of your future personal development planning.

The second questionnaire that you completed was a 360° behavioural rating questionnaire covering the same set of competencies. The focus in this questinnaire was on your behaviour and the way that you actually perform in relation to each competency. Each of your 360° assessors completed a parallel version of this questionnaire.

The feedback in this report should help you to understand how your behaviour is perceived by others and provide the basis for a re-evaluation of your talents and weaknesses, and confirm the behaviour that is most likely to get results.

This 360° process can give valuable information on: · any differences that might exist between your perception of your talents at work and how they are perceived by others. · any differences that might exist between the observations of different groups of raters, for example, does your line manager have the same view of you as your direct reports? · the comparison between different raters' views of your performance based on observed behaviour and the estimates of your potential for each of the competencies assessed.

The 360° process gives you a great deal of information to work with and a rare opportunity to re-evaluate your performance from this wider basis. It has the potential to contribute to future decisions about deployment, careers and personal development.

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

PAGE 1

® Profile:Match2

Introduction

Contents Introduction Your raters

3

How to use P:M360™

4

Competencies assessed

5

Part 1 Comparing Ratings Overall profile - the big picture

6

All Assessors vs Self

7

Managers vs Self

8

Peers vs Self

9

Direct Reports vs Self

10

Part 2 Performance vs Potential Performance vs Potential

11

Accounting for performance/potential differences

12

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles Persuasive Communication

13

Decision Making

17

Problem Solving

21

Strategic Awareness

25

Interpersonal Skills

29

Analytic

33

Attention to Detail

37

Information Management

41

Commitment

45

Resilience

49

Part 4 Plan your Development Incremental development

53

Development resources checklist

54

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

PAGE 2

® Profile:Match2

Introduction

Your raters

All the raters who answered the P:M360™ questionnaire about you are listed below. Please note that if you selected your own raters, some individuals may have been re-allocated by your Survey Manager, in which case they would appear below in a different group.

Manager Joe Bloggs Nigel Tibbs Lorraine Kelly Peer Jim Jones Peter Parker Mo Mulberry Direct report Tim Toms Edwina Edwards Dave Dodd

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

PAGE 3

® Profile:Match2

Introduction

How to use the P:M360™ feedback report STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT This report is divided into a number of sections.

INTRODUCTION The introductory pages describe the content of the P:M360™ report and give a brief description of the competencies addressed.

PART 1 - COMPARING RATINGS The first part presents a number of graphs depicting the various ratings from each group of assessors as well as an aggregate of all assessors' ratings. Any significant differences are highlighted.

PART 2 - PERFORMANCE VS POTENTIAL The second part highlights any notable differences between the rank ordering of the competencies from (a) your own rating of your performance, (b) your self-report assessment of your potential and (c) the overall performance ratings by your raters.

PART 3 - YOUR COMPETENCY PROFILES The third section forms the heart of the report and gives the results from the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment process and the P:M360™ rating process. Implications from the competency potential score are discussed and differences between performance ratings highlighted.

PART 4 - PLAN YOUR DEVELOPMENT This section will help you to focus on the most important findings for your future development and give advice on how to set some development objectives for the future.

MATCH:UP™ This is an online personal development planning tool. Designed to complement the P:M360™, it offers the opportunity to improve competencies and interpersonal performance, building on the sound foundation of informed self-awareness.

There are four parts to the MATCH:UP™ programme: Part 1: Goal Setting Part 2: Strategy Part 3: Clearing the Decks Part 4: Implementation In today's constantly and rapidly changing world, we all face the need to step up to new challenges. MATCH:UP™ provides a unique action plan to harness the most positive aspects of personality and to manage others in accordance with desired development goals.

Visit www.psychological-consultancy.com for further details.

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

PAGE 4

ÂŽ Profile:Match2

Introduction

Competencies assessed PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION To communicate effectively with all levels of the organisation and its clients. To be able to disseminate information clearly and in a form appropriate to the recipient. To express ideas or facts in a persuasive and influential manner and to be determined to convince others of one's point of view.

DECISION MAKING Having the strategies to capture the key information and a broad enough perspective to see the wider issues, high scorers will also be rational, calm and composed. They should cope with the uncertainty of unresolved questions, and be committed to decisions that advance the ambitions of the organisation.

PROBLEM SOLVING Considering oneself to be capable of delivering solutions to problems, having a good practical understanding of the issues and being innovative. High scorers should be alert to the wider implications and prepared to consider both conventional and unconventional ways to overcome difficulties.

STRATEGIC AWARENESS Concerned with an awareness of the big picture and a reasoned appreciation of the essential elements involved in organisational issues and problems. Such people will have a rational perspective and will appreciate the wider implications of their recommendations or decisions.

INTERPERSONAL SKILLS Having the capacity to relate effectively with others in the organisation, to build and maintain relationships and be interpersonally sensitive to staff, colleagues and clients and being aware of one's own impact on others.

ANALYTIC Concerned with having a systematic and considered thinking style, this competency requires a rational and logical approach. High scorers will value evidence over opinion, be wary of superficial conclusions and will base decisions on a thorough examination of all relevant factors.

ATTENTION TO DETAIL Having a concern for detail in the planning and execution of tasks. High ratings for this competency identify those that are quick to spot errors and inconsistencies. Such people have a desire for perfection, are particularly detail conscious, have high standards and a deep concern to avoid error.

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Having a respect for knowledge and factual information and being disposed to research issues and discover the available facts prior to making a decision. Such people value education and learning for its own sake, are organised and systematic and disposed to keep up to date with their areas of expertise.

COMMITMENT This is concerned with a readiness to identify with the organisational objectives and values, a determination to make one's mark, and a desire to achieve high standards. Such people are good 'organisational citizens' who comply with the expectations and procedures that define an organisation's culture.

RESILIENCE Concerned with being sure of oneself and having a capacity to cope with pressure, set-backs or the unexpected. Such individuals will be even-tempered and generally upbeat and optimistic and take things in their stride.

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

PAGE 5

® Part 1 Comparing Ratings

Profile:Match2

Overall profile - the big picture

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

RESILIENCE

Self Manager

The graph above shows: 1. Your self ratings on all the competencies 2. The average of each assessor group's ratings on all the competencies 3. Your potential, as assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire, on each of the competencies

Peer Direct Report

Potential vs Performance In the graphic above, your potential ratings are presented by the block graph in the background, indicating the extent to which your personality is likely to have a positive impact on the various competencies being assessed. Your performance ratings are represented by the line graphs. Potential and performance ratings are in a different metric and they cannot be compared directly. However, your potential for each competency will be an important consideration when interpreting these results (See Part 2 for a fuller discussion). ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 6

® Part 1 Comparing Ratings

Profile:Match2

All Assessors vs Self

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

RESILIENCE

Self All Assessors

The graph above shows: 1. Your self ratings on all the competencies 2. The average of All Assessor ratings on all the competencies 3. Your potential, as assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire, on each of the competencies Significant differences between All Assessors and Self ratings: All Assessors rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Decision Making, Problem Solving, Strategic Awareness, Commitment, Resilience.

Potential vs Performance In the graphic above, your potential ratings are presented by the block graph in the background, indicating the extent to which your personality is likely to have a positive impact on the various competencies being assessed. Your performance ratings are represented by the line graphs. Potential and performance ratings are in a different metric and they cannot be compared directly. However, your potential for each competency will be an important consideration when interpreting these results (See Part 2 for a fuller discussion). ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 7

® Part 1 Comparing Ratings

Profile:Match2

Managers vs Self

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

RESILIENCE

Manager 1 Manager 2

The graph above shows: 1. Your self ratings on all the competencies 2. Each individual Manager's ratings on all the competencies 3. Your potential, as assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire, on each of the competencies

Self Manager 3

Significant differences between Manager and Self ratings: Manager 1 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Decision Making, Problem Solving, Strategic Awareness, Interpersonal Skills, Analytic, Attention to Detail, Information Management, Commitment, Resilience.

Manager 2 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication.

Manager 3 rated you significantly higher on Decision Making, Problem Solving, Commitment, Resilience.

Potential vs Performance In the graphic above, your potential ratings are presented by the block graph in the background, indicating the extent to which your personality is likely to have a positive impact on the various competencies being assessed. Your performance ratings are represented by the line graphs. Potential and performance ratings are in a different metric and they cannot be compared directly. However, your potential for each competency will be an important consideration when interpreting these results (See Part 2 for a fuller discussion). ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 8

® Part 1 Comparing Ratings

Profile:Match2

Peers vs Self

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

RESILIENCE

Peer 1 Self

The graph above shows: 1. Your self ratings on all the competencies 2. Each individual Peer's ratings on all the competencies 3. Your potential, as assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire, on each of the competencies

Peer 2 Peer 3

Significant differences between Peer and Self ratings: Peer 1 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Decision Making, Problem Solving, Strategic Awareness, Information Management, Commitment, Resilience.

Peer 2 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Decision Making, Strategic Awareness, Attention to Detail.

Peer 3 rated you significantly higher on Decision Making, Problem Solving, Resilience.

Potential vs Performance In the graphic above, your potential ratings are presented by the block graph in the background, indicating the extent to which your personality is likely to have a positive impact on the various competencies being assessed. Your performance ratings are represented by the line graphs. Potential and performance ratings are in a different metric and they cannot be compared directly. However, your potential for each competency will be an important consideration when interpreting these results (See Part 2 for a fuller discussion). ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 9

® Part 1 Comparing Ratings

Profile:Match2

Direct Reports vs Self

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

RESILIENCE

Self Direct Report 1

The graph above shows: 1. Your self ratings on all the competencies 2. Each individual Direct Report's ratings on all the competencies 3. Your potential, as assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire, on each of the competencies

Direct Report 2 Direct Report 3

Significant differences between Direct Report and Self ratings: Direct Report 1 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Decision Making, Problem Solving, Strategic Awareness, Interpersonal Skills, Commitment, Resilience.

Direct Report 2 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Decision Making, Problem Solving, Strategic Awareness, Interpersonal Skills, Attention to Detail, Information Management, Commitment, Resilience.

Direct Report 3 rated you significantly higher on Persuasive Communication, Problem Solving, Strategic Awareness, Interpersonal Skills.

Potential vs Performance In the graphic above, your potential ratings are presented by the block graph in the background, indicating the extent to which your personality is likely to have a positive impact on the various competencies being assessed. Your performance ratings are represented by the line graphs. Potential and performance ratings are in a different metric and they cannot be compared directly. However, your potential for each competency will be an important consideration when interpreting these results (See Part 2 for a fuller discussion). ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 10

® Part 2 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

In effect, your contribution to this 360° assessment has been to rate yourself in two different ways on the same competencies. Firstly, you completed the self-report PROFILE:MATCH™ questionnaire which produced scores of your potential for each competency (the green bars above), these show the extent to which your personality is likely to facilitate or interfere with that competency. Secondly, you completed the 360° survey, rating your own performance on each competency. In addition to these two self-assessments, each of your assessors has also provided ratings of your performance. The average rating for each assessor group is plotted on the graphic above.

RESILIENCE

Self Manager Peer Direct Report

How to use this information You may find it useful to note any competencies in the table above where there is a ranking difference of more than two and reflect on the reason for this. There is additional information on the next page to help you make sense of any of these significant differences.

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

PAGE 11

® Profile:Match2

Part 2 Performance vs Potential

Accounting for performance/potential differences Significant differences between performance and potential will often be fruitful areas for personal development, whether you get higher rankings for potential or higher rankings for performance.

Performance rated lower than potential Where you have higher rankings for potential it would seem that performance is not reflecting the qualities that should give you an advantage in this area. There are many possible explanations for this and only you are really in a position to consider why this is happening. Consider the following: (a) Is it situational? Are opportunities to shine in this area blocked by other more pressing priorities (yours 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 your motivation or desire to succeed in these areas (low employee engagement, lack of ambition, work tensions or other worries)? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (c) Although your temperament may be ideal, do your skills and knowledge compare unfavourably with other colleagues or with the norm for the organisation? Could it be that you need to put in some work to make yourself a viable player in this area? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (d) Are you simply unaware of your talents and their potential to enhance your career? Perhaps, like many other people, you are taking your exceptional qualities for granted, viewing them as uninteresting because they are so familiar? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] Performance rated higher than potential In this scenario, it may appear that you are out-performing your abilities and while this may seem paradoxical it is perfectly possible. Again, only you are really in a position to consider why this is happening, For examples of why this might be, consider the following: (a) Have you had the opportunity to build your effectiveness bit by bit over time? Might you be delivering on that competency, but only as it applies in that specific situation? Are you in a situation that is particularly supportive in some way? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (b) Are you very self-aware, alert to your shortcomings and able to manage them? Does your self-knowledge help you to restrain less productive behaviours or alert you to the need to find alternative strategies in order to be effective? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (c) Is your performance flattered by the relatively poor performance of others? In 360° assessments, you are viewed in the context of local culture and expectations. Ratings will reflect this and, to this extent, they are more relative than absolute. [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ] (d) Are you highly ambitious and determined to make the best of every opportunity? Are you so competetive that you work hard to raise your game? Do you think that your performance ratings may be influenced by the fact that you are energetic or high profile? [ YES ] [ NO ] [ MAYBE ]

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

PAGE 12

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Persuasive Communication - definition 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.

PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION - POTENTIAL Your potential for Persuasive Communication competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system.

Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

4

YOUR PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION PROFILE Determined: However sociable you are, your profile suggests that you are not an assertive person. You will be leisurely and easy-going, rather than competitive. You are likely to have a modest estimation of your own views and to be receptive to other people's ideas and opinions. The idea of forcing your views on others is probably quite alien to you.

Sociable: Your main hurdle, in respect of this competency, may be to overcome your social reticence. You are unlikely to make a strong social impression and seem quite solitary and disinclined to draw attention to yourself. Paradoxically, this may be less so when addressing groups or making formal presentations, where particular areas of expertise and careful preparation can increase one's comfort zone very effectively.

Original: Persuasiveness benefits from ingenuity and the ability to think on one's feet. You appear to be very down-to-earth, and are more concerned with practicalities than with inventiveness. You are unlikely to have broad interests or very wide frames of reference. Your thinking style is likely to be focused towards practical solutions, but you may not be agile enough to think on your feet in a fast-moving discussion or debate.

Engaging: You should seem as warm, friendly and approachable as the next person. Although you may not be especially sensitive to interpersonal issues, you should recognise the importance of 'winning hearts and minds', as well as of winning the argument.

Nevertheless, you remain in control of your sentiments, give little away and remain purposeful and focused on outcomes.

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

PAGE 13

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Persuasive Communication - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Persuasive Communication competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

2

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

7

8

9

10

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

4

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

5

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

5

1

2

3

4

6

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

6

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

PAGE 14

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Persuasive Communication - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Do you lack the ability to take the lead and initiative to effectively influence others?> Would it be difficult for you to overcome your social reticence to deal with roles where you are required to persuade others on any regular basis?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' · Your peers' rating is significantly lower than your direct reports' ratings; can you think of a reason for this?

These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your persuasive communication capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 15

ÂŽ Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Persuasive Communication - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.1

2

Makes an audience feel that they are appreciated and understood

P

3.9

3

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

P

3.3

4

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

P

3.2

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Seems tough minded and oblivious to the frailties of human nature

N

1.3

2

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

N

2.0

3

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

N

2.2

4

Uncomfortable about seeming too pushy

N

2.4

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.7

2

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

P

3.7

3

Makes an audience feel that they are appreciated and understood

P

3.7

4

Uncomfortable about seeming too pushy

N

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Seems tough minded and oblivious to the frailties of human nature

N

1.7

2

Accommodates other people rather than pushing for own preferred outcomes

N

2.7

3

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

N

2.7

4

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

P

3.0

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.0

2

Makes an audience feel that they are appreciated and understood

P

4.0

3

Accommodates other people rather than pushing for own preferred outcomes

N

3.7

4

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

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Seems tough minded and oblivious to the frailties of human nature

N

0.7

2

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

N

1.3

3

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

N

1.7

4

Uncomfortable about seeming too pushy

N

1.7

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

PAGE 16

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Decision Making - definition 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.

DECISION MAKING - POTENTIAL Your potential for Decision Making competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

6

YOUR DECISION MAKING PROFILE Questioning: You seem to be down-to-earth and concerned mainly with practicalities. When making decisions you may look more to the immediate workable option, rather than to more imaginative solutions. Typically, your decisions are likely to be based on the tried and tested, rather than on speculative ideas.

Informed: Apparently not especially disposed to actively researching issues, you may often give priority to your own views and practical experiences when making decisions. Having a modest regard for the value of information, you may be inclined towards a more intuitive, optimistic approach to decision making.

Self-confident: You do not appear to be a very confident person. However well you actually manage in situations where you need to make an impression on others, you will probably feel some degree of uncertainty or self-consciousness. Any such self-doubts may contribute to a rather cautious approach to making decisions.

Compliant: You seem to be receptive to established rules and conventions. You should respect the existing procedures and routines in your working environment. It seems that you would be anxious to align your decisions with the values of your organisation and to comply with existing policies and strategies.

Rational: You are likely to be highly rational. You will have a clear understanding of the status of information and the extent to which ideas can be supported by reasoned argument. You will have a strong preference for evidence and research over opinion and intuition, and will be alert to the weaknesses of arguments, the assumptions that they rest on and the inferences that are being drawn from them. You will want to make considered decisions based on a careful analysis of all the available facts.

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

PAGE 17

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Decision Making - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Decision Making competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

3

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

6

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

5

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

5

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

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

PAGE 18

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Decision Making - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Do you rely on personal experience and intuition as a basis for decisions, rather than adequate research?

Are you lacking in confidence, indecisive and, as a result, do you tend to rely excessively on the contributions of others in your decision making?

Do you find it difficult to make decisions that involve risk or that stray from a narrow interpretation of company policy?

Are you so logical, rational and detached that you appear to lack an appreciation of less tangible, more intuitive approaches and, for this reason, miss out on some potentially innovative developments?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your decision making capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 19

ÂŽ Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Decision Making - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Researches issues thoroughly before making decisions

P

3.8

2

Is confident, decisive and sure of themself

P

3.8

3

Can work things through logically and weed out weak arguments

P

3.8

4

Their decisions are widely respected and reinforce company values

P

3.4

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.7

2

Can appear dismissive of other contributions to the decision making process

N

1.1

3

Has so many new ideas that it delays decision making

N

1.1

4

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

N

1.8

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Researches issues thoroughly before making decisions

P

4.0

2

Is confident, decisive and sure of themself

P

3.7

3

Their decisions are widely respected and reinforce company values

P

3.7

4

Can work things through logically and weed out weak arguments

P

3.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.7

2

Can appear dismissive of other contributions to the decision making process

N

1.0

3

Has so many new ideas that it delays decision making

N

1.0

4

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

N

1.7

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Is confident, decisive and sure of themself

P

4.0

2

Can work things through logically and weed out weak arguments

P

3.7

3

Always excited by new ideas and different viewpoints

P

3.7

4

Researches issues thoroughly before making decisions

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.7

2

Can appear dismissive of other contributions to the decision making process

N

1.0

3

Has so many new ideas that it delays decision making

N

1.0

4

Relies on own intuition rather than gathering all possible information

N

1.3

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

PAGE 20

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Problem Solving - definition 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.

PROBLEM SOLVING - POTENTIAL Your potential for Problem Solving competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

5

YOUR PROBLEM SOLVING PROFILE Innovative: You seem quite focused on immediate practicalities and your approach to problem solving may be more hands-on than innovative. Such people are often good with application and implementation, but may not explore the breadth of possible solutions. This may mean that you are inclined towards more conservative or traditional approaches, rather than considering the wider implications and more creative solutions.

Self-confident: You are likely to be self-doubting, rather than confident. The implication for the problem-solving competency is that you may, at times, worry about others being critical or disapproving and may lack the self-confidence to put even good problem-solving ideas forward for consideration.

Enthusiastic: You seem uncompetitive, leisurely and probably modest in your ambitions. There are two likely implications for this competency. Firstly, you are less likely than most to take responsibility for a problematic situation. Secondly, you may not show the urgency or determination required to achieve the best solution, particularly if faced with potentially discouraging setbacks. This aspect of your profile would limit the fruitfulness of any natural talent you have in this area.

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

PAGE 21

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Problem Solving - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Problem Solving competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

3

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

8

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

5

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

5

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

5

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

5

1

2

3

4

5

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

PAGE 22

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Problem Solving - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Are you so focused on the practicality of the here and now that you miss out on a wider range of possible solutions?

Do you stick to the tried-and-tested, rather than going back to basics and looking at a problem afresh?

Might you sometimes lack the confidence to put forward your ideas, even when you have more interesting ideas to offer than those currently on the table?

Do you have the energy and determination to take responsibility for a problem and see it through to a successful conclusion?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your problem solving capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 23

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Problem Solving - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

3.9

2

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

P

3.8

3

Considers the wider situation beyond the specific problem presented

P

3.4

4

Able to suggest original ideas and novel solutions

P

3.4

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Doesn't take responsibility for problems arising on their patch

N

0.7

2

Easily discouraged when things go wrong

N

1.0

3

Overestimates their own contribution when dealing with problems

N

1.7

4

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

N

1.7

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.0

2

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

P

3.7

3

Considers the wider situation beyond the specific problem presented

P

3.7

4

Able to suggest original ideas and novel solutions

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Doesn't take responsibility for problems arising on their patch

N

0.3

2

Easily discouraged when things go wrong

N

1.0

3

When faced with a problem will only consider conventional solutions

N

1.7

4

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

N

2.0

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

3.7

2

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

P

3.7

3

Will consider a number of options before committing to a solution

P

3.7

4

Considers the wider situation beyond the specific problem presented

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.7

2

Doesn't take responsibility for problems arising on their patch

N

0.7

3

Easily discouraged when things go wrong

N

1.0

4

Overestimates their own contribution when dealing with problems

N

1.7

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

PAGE 24

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Strategic Awareness - definition 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.

STRATEGIC AWARENESS - POTENTIAL Your potential for Strategic Awareness competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

7

YOUR STRATEGIC AWARENESS PROFILE Critical and Challenging: Strategic awareness requires a disposition that questions, challenges and critically evaluates within a big picture context. You may generally be accepting of things, rather than always looking for explanations. You seem more concerned with current realities than with speculative questions. Your outlook is probably more conventional than imaginative.

Your capacity to think strategically may be limited by a tendency to focus on the task in hand, rather than on the wider context.

Rational:You are likely to be a highly rational person. You will have a clear understanding of the status of information and the extent to which ideas can be supported by reasoned argument. You will have a strong preference for evidence and research over opinion and intuition, and will be alert to the weaknesses of arguments, the assumptions that they rest on and the inferences that are being drawn from them. You will want to make considered decisions based on a careful analysis of all the available facts.

Prudent: Being a good corporate citizen, you may be uncomfortable about breaking with tradition and challenging the values of your organisation. Such people are accepting of the established procedures and will readily conform to expected codes of conduct, so their ability to think beyond that framework may be limited.

Compliant: Whether or not you are imaginative, your cautious nature and compliance with the established strategic rationale of the organisation may inhibit your capacity to consider radically new strategies. Such people are evolutionary rather than revolutionary in their approach.

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

PAGE 25

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Strategic Awareness - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Strategic Awareness competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

3

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

8

9

10

6

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

5

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

6

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

7

PAGE 26

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Strategic Awareness - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Are you so focused on immediate practicalities that you are unaware of the big picture and wider strategic issues?

Are you so unquestioning and conventional in your thinking that you lack the imagination to conceive the radical strategies that may be called for?

Are you so logical, rational and detached that you appear to lack sensitivity on some less tangible issues, as well as missing out on some potentially innovative developments?

Do you have difficulty in thinking outside the accepted traditions and established policies and procedures?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' · Why do you think your managers' rating is significantly lower than your direct reports' ratings?

These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your strategic awareness capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 27

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Strategic Awareness - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.2

2

Develops strategies that take account of external changes and developments

P

3.6

3

Critically considers the assumptions and rationale behind any proposed policies

P

3.6

4

Has a clear preference for evidence over opinion or intuition

P

3.1

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Alarms others with radical and unconventional proposals

N

0.8

2

Doesn’t support decisions with any clear rationale

N

1.0

3

Desire to preserve traditional approaches inhibits more future proof strategies

N

1.4

4

Plans and strategies reflect short term thinking only

N

1.6

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.3

2

Easily isolates the essential issues when planning

P

3.3

3

Identifies the hurdles and hazards blocking organisational objectives

P

3.3

4

Critically considers the assumptions and rationale behind any proposed policies

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Alarms others with radical and unconventional proposals

N

0.7

2

Doesn’t support decisions with any clear rationale

N

1.3

3

Desire to preserve traditional approaches inhibits more future proof strategies

N

1.7

4

Plans and strategies reflect short term thinking only

N

1.7

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.0

2

Develops strategies that take account of external changes and developments

P

4.0

3

Has a clear preference for evidence over opinion or intuition

P

3.7

4

Critically considers the assumptions and rationale behind any proposed policies

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Doesn’t support decisions with any clear rationale

N

0.0

2

Alarms others with radical and unconventional proposals

N

0.7

3

Desire to preserve traditional approaches inhibits more future proof strategies

N

1.0

4

Plans and strategies reflect short term thinking only

N

1.0

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

PAGE 28

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Interpersonal Skills - definition 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.

INTERPERSONAL SKILLS - POTENTIAL Your potential for Interpersonal Skills competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

5

YOUR INTERPERSONAL SKILLS PROFILE Engaging: You appear to be as sensitive towards others as most. You should seem as warm, open and approachable as the next person. You will probably achieve a balance between being focused on the task at hand and being sympathetic and emotionally sensitive towards others.

Sociable: Whether or not you are engaging, you are probably not a talkative, gregarious person. You appear to have relatively little need for company. You may be a listener rather than a talker, and rarely the one to initiate conversation. Although you may cope adequately with the social scene at work, your rather solitary nature suggests that in many social engagements you would be operating outside your comfort zone.

Assertive: You seem to be very unassertive and unlikely to make a very strong first impression. Your profile suggests that, however you come across, your objectives are likely to be purely personal and social rather than working to any other agendas or seeking personal advantage. In a work or team situation, you may miss opportunities to advance goals through networking or collaboration.

Independent: Your manner probably illustrates your concern about other people's opinions of you. You seem to be someone for whom popularity and consensus are important - someone who views your popularity as an essential aspect of your influence. In terms of your interpersonal skills, you will be more concerned than most about building and maintaining relationships.

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

PAGE 29

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Interpersonal Skills - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Interpersonal Skills competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

4

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

6

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

5

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

5

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

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

PAGE 30

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Interpersonal Skills - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Does your social reticence and contentment with your own company reduce the opportunities you have to build and maintain relationships?

Does your modest ambition mean that you put little effort into effectively engaging with others or taking the initiative socially?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low average range, is significantly and significantly lower than your direct reports' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your interpersonal skills capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 31

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Interpersonal Skills - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

3.7

2

Proactive about building effective working relationships

P

3.4

3

Shows understanding of others’ motivations and perspectives

P

3.2

4

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

P

3.2

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.2

2

Unconcerned about other peoples' opinions

N

1.6

3

Seems unaware of the impact of their behaviour on other people

N

1.7

4

Tends not to initiate interaction with others except when necessary

N

1.9

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.0

2

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

P

3.7

3

Avoids upsetting others with critical or contentious views

P

3.3

4

Proactive about building effective working relationships

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.3

2

Seems unaware of the impact of their behaviour on other people

N

2.0

3

Unconcerned about other peoples' opinions

N

2.3

4

Shows understanding of others’ motivations and perspectives

P

2.7

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

3.7

2

Proactive about building effective working relationships

P

3.3

3

Shows understanding of others’ motivations and perspectives

P

3.3

4

Is an assertive person who makes their presence felt

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.3

2

Unconcerned about other peoples' opinions

N

0.7

3

Tends not to initiate interaction with others except when necessary

N

1.0

4

Seems unaware of the impact of their behaviour on other people

N

1.0

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

PAGE 32

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Analytic - definition 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.

ANALYTIC - POTENTIAL Your potential for Analytic competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

7

YOUR ANALYTIC PROFILE Rational: You are likely to be a highly rational person. You will have a clear understanding of the status of information and the extent to which ideas can be supported by reasoned argument. You will have a strong preference for objective evidence and will want to make considered decisions based on a careful analysis of the facts. Having a logical mindset, you will be alert to the weaknesses of arguments, the assumptions that they rest on and the inferences that are being drawn from them.

Questioning: You appear quite down-to-earth and accepting and probably not interested in questioning or analysing things unless situations are brought to your attention. Your focus on immediate circumstances and the realities of the moment suggests that you may not challenge established assumptions so that your approach to any analysis may be rather limited.

Imaginative: You seem to have a fairly practical focus and not to be particularly imaginative or visionary. You may approach analysis with a circumscribed viewpoint rather than adopting the big-picture view or analysing things from a variety of different perspectives.

Evidence Based: You probably won't spend too much time reading around issues, perhaps preferring to learn through hands-on experience rather than through formal education or training. You may be content to acquire just enough information about an issue, rather than extensive knowledge, and to trust your own intuition or the opinions of others in your vicinity. At times, this approach may mean that your analysis is based on a rather uncertain platform of information.

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

PAGE 33

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Analytic - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Analytic competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

5

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

5

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

8

5

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

6

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

1

2

3

4

5

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

PAGE 34

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Analytic - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Are you so logical, rational and detached that you appear to lack sensitivity, as well as missing out on some potentially innovative developments?

Are you comparatively unquestioning in your approach and unlikely to challenge established assumptions?

Do you tend to focus narrowly on the immediate practicalities of the moment, rather than exploring and analysing the wider picture and a variety of solutions?

Do you feel that knowledge acquired informally in the workplace is sufficient to keep you abreast of developments in your field?

Do you research decisions adequately and prepare sufficiently for events?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the average range, is not significantly different to any of the assessor group ratings These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your analytic capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 35

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Analytic - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Adopts an evidence based approach to issues

P

3.9

2

Easily generates and debates ‘what if’ scenarios

P

3.4

3

Approaches things in a detached and logical way

P

3.2

4

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

P

3.1

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Judgements can often be influenced non-rational considerations

N

1.4

2

Accepts explanations without asking questions or probing in depth

N

1.4

3

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

N

1.8

4

Relies mostly on personal judgement rather than systematic analysis

N

1.9

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Easily generates and debates ‘what if’ scenarios

P

4.0

2

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

P

4.0

3

Adopts an evidence based approach to issues

P

3.7

4

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

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Accepts explanations without asking questions or probing in depth

N

1.7

2

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

N

2.0

3

Judgements can often be influenced non-rational considerations

N

2.0

4

Relies mostly on personal judgement rather than systematic analysis

N

2.3

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Adopts an evidence based approach to issues

P

4.0

2

Easily generates and debates ‘what if’ scenarios

P

3.3

3

Approaches things in a detached and logical way

P

3.0

4

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

P

1.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Judgements can often be influenced non-rational considerations

N

0.7

2

Accepts explanations without asking questions or probing in depth

N

1.3

3

Readily expresses opinions on subjects they know little about

N

1.3

4

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

P

1.7

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

PAGE 36

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Attention to Detail - definition 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.

ATTENTION TO DETAIL - POTENTIAL Your potential for Attention to Detail competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

5

YOUR ATTENTION TO DETAIL PROFILE Exacting: You may have a casual regard for quality and a reluctance or lack of vigilance about meeting desired standards, but will also have a high degree of openness to different and new ways of doing things. You may be easily distracted, careless and disorganised, or simply be content for work products to be of sufficient rather than optimal quality. So far as attention to detail is concerned, these characteristics are likely to have an adverse influence on performance.

Compliant: You seem to appreciate the necessity for procedures and routines in the working environment and are probably more concerned than most about producing work to the required standard. Whether or not you are perfectionistic by temperament, you should have the desire to achieve the standards and levels of detail required of you.

Focused: You seem to have an outlook that is more practical than theoretical. Such people focus well on the task in hand and are not distracted by a vivid imagination, curiosity or speculative questions. These characteristics should contribute to your ability to stick to a task and, from this perspective, you should make a positive contribution to this competency.

Needs Variety: People with this profile will often be content to work within well-defined roles and may not have high expectations that their work should be stimulating. They should have a capacity to deal with repetitive, detailed tasks without the boredom sometimes induced in others.

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

PAGE 37

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Attention to Detail - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Attention to Detail competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

4

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

6

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

8

6

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

6

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

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

PAGE 38

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Attention to Detail - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Would you have a casual regard for quality and not be vigilant enough about completing tasks to a consistently high standard?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low average range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your attention to detail capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 39

ÂŽ Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Attention to Detail - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Shows a high degree of concern for accuracy

P

4.0

2

Attentive to detail in the planning and execution of tasks

P

4.0

3

Perseveres with repetitive or routine elements of work

P

4.0

4

Conforms with established procedures and does things by the book

P

3.4

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Is impulsive, spontaneous and unpredictable

N

0.9

2

Sometimes seems careless and disorganised

N

1.1

3

Is casual and unstructured in their approach

N

1.9

4

Is individualistic and seems unconcerned about disapproval

N

2.0

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Perseveres with repetitive or routine elements of work

P

4.7

2

Attentive to detail in the planning and execution of tasks

P

4.3

3

Shows a high degree of concern for accuracy

P

4.0

4

Conforms with established procedures and does things by the book

P

3.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Sometimes seems careless and disorganised

N

0.7

2

Is impulsive, spontaneous and unpredictable

N

0.7

3

Is casual and unstructured in their approach

N

2.0

4

Deeply concerned about making mistakes

P

2.7

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Shows a high degree of concern for accuracy

P

3.7

2

Attentive to detail in the planning and execution of tasks

P

3.7

3

Perseveres with repetitive or routine elements of work

P

3.3

4

Deeply concerned about making mistakes

P

3.0

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Sometimes seems careless and disorganised

N

0.0

2

Is individualistic and seems unconcerned about disapproval

N

1.0

3

Is impulsive, spontaneous and unpredictable

N

1.0

4

Is casual and unstructured in their approach

N

1.3

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

PAGE 40

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Information Management - definition 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.

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT - POTENTIAL Your potential for Information Management competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

3

YOUR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT PROFILE Knowledge oriented: There is an important distinction in attitudes to learning and development between lifelong learners (who value learning as an end in itself), those who view learning pragmatically (as a means to an end), and those for whom learning is rarely 'on the radar screen'. You are likely to have a preference for independent learning, rather than formal teaching. You may not devote time to reading around your particular business or professional area unless you have a specific reason to do so. People with this profile may be disposed to acquire just sufficient knowledge, rather than covering it thoroughly, and they may be comfortable making decisions influenced as much by intuition and opinion as by researching the relevant facts.

Ambitious: One's attitude to learning and the priority given to advancing one's personal knowledge - as described above - are probably the most important aspects of this competency. However, career focused drive and ambition will also play a part. You seem to be motivated mainly by your own particular interests, and any desire for knowledge is likely to be associated with current enthusiasms. Seemingly relaxed and uncompetitive, you may find it difficult to really master knowledge relevant to your role and your career, particularly in roles where regulations, technology or product knowledge are complex, extensive and changing rapidly.

Exhaustive: You may have an unsystematic or disorganised approach, but have also a high degree of openness to different and new ways of doing things. This profile suggests that you may be easily distracted, careless and disorganised, or just content to access information sufficient for the immediate task, rather than being thorough. These characteristics may have an adverse influence, particularly in roles where the pressure for knowledge is continuous.

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

PAGE 41

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Information Management - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Information Management competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

4

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

5

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

8

5

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

6

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

1

2

3

4

5

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

PAGE 42

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Information Management - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Are you inclined to follow your intuition or 'gut feeling', rather than ensuring that you are aware of the facts?

Do you ever research issues and make use of online sources and all the other information available?

Does your modest ambition imply a casual approach to work-related knowledge and the management of information?

Do you have a rather casual regard for planning, organising and following detailed procedures?

Are you lacking in vigilance about keeping yourself up to date with work relevant knowledge?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low average range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your information management capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 43

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Information Management - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

3.8

2

Shows respect for knowledge and factual information

P

3.7

3

An advocate of continuous professional development

P

3.7

4

Goes about keeping informed in a planned and systematic way

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Doesn’t investigate work related issues in any organised way

N

0.9

2

Overlooks new developments in their own area of expertise

N

1.2

3

Avoids challenges that require extending one’s knowledge base

N

1.2

4

Unconcerned whether they seem informed or knowledgeable

N

1.9

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

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

P

4.0

2

Shows respect for knowledge and factual information

P

3.3

3

An advocate of continuous professional development

P

3.3

4

Goes about keeping informed in a planned and systematic way

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Overlooks new developments in their own area of expertise

N

0.7

2

Doesn’t investigate work related issues in any organised way

N

0.7

3

Avoids challenges that require extending one’s knowledge base

N

1.7

4

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

P

2.3

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

An advocate of continuous professional development

P

4.0

2

Goes about keeping informed in a planned and systematic way

P

3.3

3

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

P

3.3

4

Shows respect for knowledge and factual information

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Doesn’t investigate work related issues in any organised way

N

0.7

2

Avoids challenges that require extending one’s knowledge base

N

1.0

3

Overlooks new developments in their own area of expertise

N

1.3

4

Unconcerned whether they seem informed or knowledgeable

N

1.3

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

PAGE 44

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Commitment - definition 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.

COMMITMENT - POTENTIAL Your potential for Commitment competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

6

YOUR COMMITMENT PROFILE Conforming: You are likely to respect rules and regulations and be keen to comply with established codes of behaviour. People like you tend to have a clear set of principles that guide their interpersonal behaviour. Less impulsive than most, you should be quite cautious and judge exposure to risk carefully. You are likely to be prudent and to respect authority.

Loyal: You should be a good organisational citizen who will want to identify with the values of the company. People like this tend to see alignment with corporate values in a positive way and take pleasure in belonging to that culture.

Methodical: You seem easily distracted, careless and disorganised about your work. You may have a casual regard for procedures and a reluctance to do things 'by the book'. However, you should also have a degree of openness to different and new ways of doing things. Whether or not you are committed to the organisation in other ways, your work may suffer from inconsistency and poor organisation.

Assertive: You appear to be easy-going and uncompetitive and to have modest aspirations. Such people are often reluctant to take on additional responsibility, to take charge or to show initiative. They may be very confident in their area of expertise, but content with their position in life and current status. While such people may enjoy their work for a wide variety of reasons, they are less likely to have a sense of urgency or a passion about making the company successful.

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

PAGE 45

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Commitment - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Commitment competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

2

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

5

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

5

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

8

5

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

6

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

1

2

3

4

5

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

PAGE 46

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Commitment - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Are you so committed to traditional values that you resist innovation?

Are you so rule conscious that you over-react to minor misdemeanours?

Do you have a tendency to cut corners to get the job done?

Is your work disorganised and disregarding of procedures?

Are you driven enough to contribute towards company objectives?

Does modest drive prevent your talents from being expressed?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your commitment capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 47

ÂŽ Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Commitment - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Is determined to make a success of things

P

4.2

2

Works hard to fulfill company expectations

P

4.2

3

Works hard to deliver on time and to the required specification

P

4.0

4

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

P

3.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Views being dutiful as compromising one's individuality

N

1.1

2

Content if work is satisfactory rather than aspiring to perfection

N

1.9

3

Takes a leisurely, unhurried approach to task completion

N

2.0

4

Fulfils contractual requirements, but without giving additional time and energy

N

2.1

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Works hard to deliver on time and to the required specification

P

4.3

2

Is determined to make a success of things

P

4.3

3

Works hard to fulfill company expectations

P

4.3

4

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

P

4.0

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Views being dutiful as compromising one's individuality

N

1.0

2

Content if work is satisfactory rather than aspiring to perfection

N

2.0

3

Takes a leisurely, unhurried approach to task completion

N

2.7

4

Takes part in all aspects of organisational life

P

3.0

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Works hard to fulfill company expectations

P

4.0

2

Is determined to make a success of things

P

3.7

3

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

P

3.3

4

Concerned to do everything to a consistently high standard

P

3.3

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

Views being dutiful as compromising one's individuality

N

1.0

2

Fulfils contractual requirements, but without giving additional time and energy

N

1.3

3

Takes a leisurely, unhurried approach to task completion

N

1.7

4

Content if work is satisfactory rather than aspiring to perfection

N

2.0

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

PAGE 48

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Resilience - definition 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.

RESILIENCE - POTENTIAL Your potential for Resilience competence has been assessed by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. Your score and its implications are given below.

Potential

7

YOUR RESILIENCE PROFILE Emotional: You should seem grounded in your response to events and will seem quite unemotional, relaxed and composed. You will not overreact to situations or allow little things to trouble you.

Stress Tolerant: You are apparently untroubled by events that would disturb most other people. You are unusually calm and unflappable, should generally take life's ups and downs in your stride and cope well with pressure.

Even-tempered: You are likely to be very even-tempered and consistent in your moods. Because people know where they stand with you, you will have a calming effect on others and be easy to deal with.

Self-confident: You will seem somewhat unsure of yourself. Regardless of how well you actually cope, you may often feel self-conscious. This self-doubt and cautious manner will impact on people's perceptions of your self-confidence.

Trusting: You seem quite an apprehensive person and may seem rather wary of others and to initially distrust them. You are unlikely to presume that others will take to you and could therefore be more sceptical about other people's reactions than most.

Optimistic: You will seem to be more pessimistic than optimistic. You will at times worry about your ability and effectiveness and be anxious that things may not go well. You may be more easily discouraged than most and may seem easily defeated or fatalistic.

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

PAGE 49

® Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Profile:Match2

Resilience - performance ratings You have been rated by various colleagues at work on your Resilience competence. These performance ratings, along with your self-ratings, are shown in the charts below.

4

SELF

RANGE OF RATINGS

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

6

7

8

9

10

7

8

9

10

6

DIRECT REPORT

RANGE OF RATINGS

8

6

PEER

RANGE OF RATINGS

7

6

MANAGER

RANGE OF RATINGS

6

1

2

3

4

5

6

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

PAGE 50

® Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Resilience - points to consider Below you will find information from a number of sources that you may find helpful when attempting to compile a complete picture of your own competence in this area. The first source 'Points for self-reflection' comes from the assessment of your potential by the PROFILE:MATCH™ assessment system. The second source, 'Discrepancy analysis', describes any significant differences between the various groups of assessors that rated your performance on this competency.

This information should be considered alongside what you already know about yourself and you may find it particularly useful to look at those areas where either the assessment of potential, or the ratings do not agree with your own assessment of your competence on this competency.

The final source, 'Most and least endorsed items', lists those items that your raters felt were most descriptive of you for this competency. The items that received the highest and lowest ratings are shown along with their average rating score. This analysis is presented for all groups of raters, except Managers.

Points for self-reflection The points below relate to your particular score on this competency; you may find it useful to take a moment to consider whether any of these tendencies might be a particular concern for you.

Are there occasions when your anxieties and suspicions interfere with your performance?

Are you easily discouraged and difficult for others to enthuse and motivate?

Discrepancy analysis The points below relate to any significant differences between groups of assessors when rating your performance on this competency. · Your self rating, which is in the low average range, is significantly and significantly lower than your managers' ,peers and direct reports' These ratings should be viewed alongside the assessment evidence of your resilience capability which suggests you would be capable of average competence in this area.

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

PAGE 51

ÂŽ Profile:Match2

Part 3 Your Competency Profiles

Resilience - most and least endorsed items Each of the following tables illustrates the way that different groups of raters responded when assessing your performance on this competency.

Most and least endorsed items by ALL RATERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses overall. Each item is followed by the average rating, based on all raters responses (omitting only your own responses).

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Able to debate their proposals without becoming defensive

P

4.3

2

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

P

4.0

3

Accepts challenges, expressing confidence in own ability to meet them

P

4.0

4

Maintains effectiveness during periods of high pressure

P

3.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.1

2

Allows events or the behaviour of others to undermine their confidence

N

1.0

3

Loses composure if disturbed by unexpected setbacks

N

1.4

4

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

N

2.2

Most and least endorsed items by PEERS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your peers.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Able to debate their proposals without becoming defensive

P

5.0

2

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

P

4.3

3

Accepts challenges, expressing confidence in own ability to meet them

P

4.0

4

Their trust and optimism inspires self-belief in others

P

3.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.0

2

Allows events or the behaviour of others to undermine their confidence

N

1.3

3

Loses composure if disturbed by unexpected setbacks

N

1.7

4

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

N

2.3

Most and least endorsed items by DIRECT REPORTS The following items attracted the most consistent responses from your direct reports.

The four MOST endorsed items

AVG

1

Able to debate their proposals without becoming defensive

P

4.3

2

Accepts challenges, expressing confidence in own ability to meet them

P

4.0

3

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

P

3.7

4

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

P

3.7

The four LEAST endorsed items 1

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

N

0.0

2

Allows events or the behaviour of others to undermine their confidence

N

0.7

3

Loses composure if disturbed by unexpected setbacks

N

1.0

4

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

N

1.7

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

PAGE 52

® Profile:Match2

Part 4 Plan Your Development

Incremental development If you want it to be, personal development can be a life long process. Everyone can improve their performance in one way or another and this P:M360™ report will create excellent opportunities for self-reflection and development planning.

Your task now is to turn your new self-awareness into clearly defined personal development goals. Initially, these may be defined very broadly but it will help you to monitor progress if you break things down into smaller steps - clearly defined behaviours that can be observed and counted.

SUGGESTED INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS: 1) Identify which competencies you want to improve and set broad goals 2) Define achievable targets - specific behavioural objectives: a) Consider the descriptive text of your profile (part 3) b) Consider any Points for Self-reflection (part 3) c) Read through the Discrepancy Analysis (part 3) d) Consider the Most and Least Endorsed Items (part 3) e) Look at comparisons between self and other group ratings (part 1) f) Consider any consistent ratings (part 1) g) Evaluate differences between your performance and your potential (part 2) 3) Select realistic stratgies that reflect your potential. Are you: a) Exploiting high potential and shooting for the stars? b) Recognising some limitations but ectending your comfort zone? c) Compensating for recognised weaknesses and developing 'work-arounds' ?

4) Plan implementation: a) Set time-lines that are demanding but realistic b) Can you get others to feed back on your performance/improvement? c) If self-monitoring, can you appoint a colleague as mentor? d) Keep things moving, build on success by setting new targets Every personality has its advantages and disadvantages so development is very much a personal issue. The approach adopted here is that there are fundamental aspects of your personality that cannot be changed, but that they can be managed and performance can be continuously improved. Discovering where your greatest assets lie, where your first impulse may undermine your efforts, and how you can become more effective, is an exciting and rewarding process. P:M360™ will help you to set a course towards the realisation of your full capabilities.

EXAMPLE: Derailed by talent - a real world paradox Helen is a confident, extraverted, spontaneous individual whose ability to 'wing-it' is her special talent. It often serves her well when giving presentations or dealing with clients. However, her 360° Feedback made her recognise that spontaneity could be a high-risk strategy. She recognised a need to handle client meetings more consistently and effectively. Her first milestone towards this goal was to set out a game plan for each meeting; specifying exactly what she wished to achieve and identifying where she may need to rein in her impulsiveness. Each meeting was followed by a detailed review of what went on, where she was most effective and where she could have handled things better. In this way a virtuous circle of improvements was initiated. Preparing well but using her spontaneity to good effect in establishing rapport, Helen made better use of her talents while avoiding over reliance on an approach that, on its own,could become a liability. ©PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LIMITED, 8 MOUNT EPHRAIM, TUNBRIDGE WELLS, TN4 8AS, TELEPHONE: 01892 559540

PAGE 53

® Profile:Match2

Part 4 Plan Your Development

Development resources checklist Your P:M360™ Report provides you with a lot of material on which to base your thoughts and plans for future development. Use the following check-list to ensure that you are considering, or have considered, all the indicators available in this report when considering your personal development plans.

PART 1 - variability amongst raters Your self-ratings of performance compared with ratings by each rater group - where are the biggest differences between your self-ratings and the perceptions of others? Remember, these are averaged over the entire group of raters.

Discrepancies between performance ratings - do the different groups rate you differently? If they do, can you think why this might be?

The consistency of performance ratings - do people within the same group rate you differently? The more consistent they are, the more likely it is that this represents a consistency in the pattern of your behaviour.

The range of performance ratings, how extreme are the variations of ratings within each group?

PART 2 - potential vs performance Are you performing best in the competencies where you show greatest potential?

Are there competencies on which you perform better than expected?

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

Competency ratings. These are indicies of potential. Might your temperament help or hinder you?

Passage of description text. Each looks at different aspects of temperament; within each competency which are your strongest/ weakest points?

Points for self-reflection. These address issues raised by your questionnaire responses. They may be more relevant to some people than to others, but don't dismiss them out of hand!

Discrepancy analyses. These highlight any significant differences between groups of raters. You should consider why your performance might be viewed differently by different groups.

Most and least endorsed items. This analysis shows which items your raters felt were most and least descriptive of you. Do peers and direct reports agree?

MATCH:UP™ You will find further online help in turning 360° Feedback into an effective and realistic personal development plan on the PROFILE:MATCH™ website. MATCH:UP™ offers a step by step process that turns assessment into action. To get the most out of this report, MATCH:UP™ takes you through an online personal development planning process that encompasses everything from competency selection tips through to managing feedback as you work towards your development goals. Visit www.psychological-consultancy.com for further details.

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

PAGE 54