July 2006 Vol 3; No.6

The Helm Report:  Tools, Tips, & Techniques for avoiding hiring mistakes and developing people.

Published on the second Thursday of each month

Barbara Otto, Editor (mail to mailto:botto@helmtest.com

Visit us online at http://www.helmtest.com/

Word count for this issue – 1,277

Approximate time to read = 7 minutes  

Dear Friend,

Do you have a key manager who doesn’t like to spend time around people?  “Sam” is one of your most knowledgeable managers and he is easily the most experienced.  Sam’s problem is that he is shy.  He keeps to himself unless he is actively brought into a discussion, and even then he tends to volunteer little and to offer only one-word answers.  He tends to “manage by memo and email” because that allows him to avoid face-to-face contact with people.  His shyness has already cost him one promotion, and he will get passed up for the next one if he doesn’t come out of his shell.  What to do?

Three Steps To Take

First, review Sam’s Performance Profile Report.  This will help you understand Sam’s natural preferences so that you can find a way to explain to him why he needs to overcome his shyness.

You will very likely discover that Sam’s “Sociability” rating is low, probably a “3” or below.  What this tells you is that, for Sam, interacting with other people is uncomfortable and tiring.  He has to spend personal energy when he interacts with people, or spends time in groups.  This means that he will tend to avoid interacting with others whenever he can.  Telling Sam that he must get out of his office and talk to his coworkers and subordinates is like telling a carpenter he should hit his thumb with a hammer more often.  Simply telling someone to do something that they find awkward and fatiguing usually doesn’t work.  Even if Sam’s “Friendliness” rating is moderately high, which indicates that he likes people and considers it important to be pleasant with them, it doesn’t mean that he will voluntarily put himself into positions where he must interact with people.

Second, set up a meeting with Sam for just the two of you.   Appeal to his intelligence and knowledge about the job.  Point out that even though he is uncomfortable interacting with people face-to-face, it is the best and most direct way to get answers to questions, exchange ideas, and get feedback.  And it is a necessary part of his job.  Be ready with specific, job-relevant examples of the kind of behavior that has caused problems in the past, and the kind of behavior that has worked for Sam.  Include, in your conversation with Sam, assurances that increasing the amount of time he interacts with people will increase his comfort level (and social confidence) with doing so.  Stress that becoming more comfortable at interacting with others can help Sam be more effective as a manager and as a team player.

Third, use the Action Plan at the back of the Professional Development Guide (or one of your own choosing) to help Sam create a concrete plan of do-able steps to increase his social confidence.  If possible, for example, you might arrange to send Sam to a Dale Carnegie course on public speaking, or suggest that he attend Toastmasters, International, meetings where he will gain experience is all aspects of speaking with others.

Keep in mind that helping Sam improve his social confidence is not like flipping a switch.  This kind of change will require time and a consistent effort on Sam’s part.  Look for small signs of improvement and acknowledge them with appropriate, positive feedback.  Letting Sam know that you see improvement is the best way to build his social confidence.

A Performance Profile client writes:

“We have tested three applicants for an Administrative Assistant (AA) position and all of them have had an Intelligence rating of “4” or below.  I’m beginning to think that this is the best we are going to be able to do for an AA position.  What I want to know is how important is a low rating on Intelligence for an AA position?”

And The Answer Is

It depends on the level of complexity of the AA position in question.  If all the person is going to do is answer the phone and screen the boss’s email, then a rating of “4” is probably acceptable, as long as the applicant is a mature individual with several years experience as an AA.

On the other hand, if this is an AA position for a high-level executive that will require handling his or her schedule, drafting memos, and making on-the-spot decisions about who gets in to see the boss and who gets very diplomatically turned away, then you want someone with a bit more intellectual horsepower – that is, someone with a rating of at least “6” on “Intelligence.”

The rule of thumb is:  the more complex the job, the smarter you want the person who fills the job to be.

The Work Attitude Questionnaire Report has been improved so that it is easier to see why a person’s responses to a question can result in a “Moderate Risk” or “High Risk” rating.   Formerly, such a response would result in the question itself being printed in Section IV of the Report along with the person’s response.  For example, if the person responded to item number 56 by choosing the “5, Very Slightly Agree” response, the Report would reproduce the item like this:

56.  If co-workers regularly take small amounts of cash or merchandise and get away with it, then it is all right for you to also.

John Doe’s response:  (5) Very Slightly Agree

The problem this can create for someone who is not familiar with the Work Attitude Questionnaire is that the “(5) Very Slightly Agree” response doesn’t sound that bad when you look at it by itself.  Not being able to see the entire ten-point response scale obscures the fact that the only completely acceptable response is “(0) Totally Disagree.”

In order to clarify things, from now on for every item that results in a “Moderate Risk” or a “High Risk” rating, a copy of the entire response scale, with the test taker’s response highlighted, will be printed in Section IV of the Report.  What you will see will look like this:

56.  If co-workers regularly take small amounts of cash or merchandise and get away with it, then it is all right for you to also.

John Doe’s response:  (5) Very Slightly Agree

You can see from this example that the test-taker’s answer, when seen in the context of all available responses, raises the question of why the person avoided choosing the “(0) Totally Disagree” response. 

Remember, you will only see this new report format when an applicant is rated “Moderate Risk” or “High Risk” in one of the four risk categories of Theft, Drug Use, Workplace Violence, and Sexual Harassment.  No questions/responses are printed in Section IV of the report for applicants rated “”Low Risk” or “Slight Risk” as these are considered to be within acceptable limits.  If you would like to see another example of the new format, we have posted one at our web site.  You can view it by clicking anywhere in this sentence.

There are no changes in the way the Work Attitude Questionnaire is scored; the only change we have made is in the amount of detail provided in the Results Report.  We want these reports to be as useful and informative as we can make them!

If you have any questions about these changes, please call me at (800) 886-4356, or send me an email at khelm@helmtest.com.  I always like to hear from you!

Remember, people are your most important asset!

To hire the best, test!

            To reveal management potential, test!

To diagnose problem behavior, test!

Best regards,

Kurt G. Helm, Ph.D.

Phone Toll Free 800-886-4356

Email:   khelm@helmtest.com

Website:    http://www.helmtest.com/

© 2006, Kurt G. Helm, Ph.D.  All rights reserved.  You are allowed to use material from this newsletter in whole or in part provided that you include attribution in the following form:  “By Kurt G. Helm, Ph.D., of Helm and Associates, Inc.  Please visit our website at http://www.helmtest.com/ for more information about how to avoid hiring mistakes by using pre-employment testing as part of the applicant evaluation procedure.”