The Effect of an interview on PA reports
The Effect of an interview on the Extended DISC Personal Analysis Report
A recent telephone conversation with one of our recruitment consultant clients reminded me of a classic example of why it is important in recruitment to be careful not to explain to the candidate the behavioural style the organisation is looking for in a new recruit before he/she completes the personal analysis questionnaire.
The interesting thing to us is that there was very little change in Profile II (the profile that generates the report) but quite a shift in Profile I after the interview had taken place. Let us explain why we think this happened.
One of our more frequent users was looking to employ a consultant and before the interview they arranged for the candidate to complete the on-line questionnaire. This was duly completed, the personal analysis report was received some ten minutes after the questionnaire was submitted and a copy of the two profiles taken from the report is shown opposite.
The two profiles were both relatively strong and definite profiles and remembering that the shape of Profile II is “who the person is” and the size and position of both profiles is “how they are feeling”, the report seemed to us to be an accurate assessment.
There seemed no doubt that the candidate’s unconscious and conscious behavioural styles were very similar and the flexibility zones were virtually all in the “I” corner of the diamond.
The applicant then attended an interview and the role of the job was explained clearly leading to his conclusion that the successful applicant would need to be competitive, dominant, adventurous, bold and perhaps, in his view, tough.
Clearly neither of his profiles fitted this requirement and although he did not have the approval of his prospective employer, he went on-line after the interview and completed the personal analysis questionnaire once again and a copy of the two resulting profiles are shown opposite.
It will be noted that Profile II has changed very little and indeed the shape is virtually the same with just a little less emphasis on the “I” characteristics however Profile I, has shown quite a change. The original Profile I indicated that the applicant’s conscious adjusted style was 100% “I” but in the second report we find the profile became “tighter” and moved to become 60% “D” and 40% “I”. So not only did his perceived conscious behavioural style change, but he also showed indications of being a little uncertain of his role. Quite a change from the confident Profile I shown in the first report!
Remembering that Profile I illustrates the conscious adjusted behavioural style, - the style the person feels he needs to adopt to cope with the demands and pressures of his environment, this is an excellent example of the accuracy of Extended DISC®. The applicant was unable to change his unconscious behavioural style but able to alter his conscious style and as the Extended DISC® Personal Analysis Report is based on the unconscious profile, the two reports remained very similar. Some other DISC based programs, which focus on the conscious behavioural style of the candidate would have produced two completely different reports!
The conclusion? Our advice to our user client was that the first report was probably more accurate than the second although there was little change in the text. “I” traits remained the dominant characteristic and there was still no indication of any “D” traits in the applicant’s unconscious behavioural style despite the fact that he had probably looked for this shift in his second report.