Four sources of evidence for a leadership decision

Most appointment mistakes are not caused by a lack of information but by information from a single source. A brilliant interview, an isolated test or a manager's opinion produce a picture that is coherent and, at the same time, incomplete. Leadership assessment exists to add perspectives that correct each other.

What each source contributes

In our method every leader is observed from four different angles, and each dimension of the success profile is supported by at least two of them.

• Psychometrics: personality tendencies, reasoning and working style, with validated instruments and comparable norms.
• Competency interview: evidence of past behaviour in concrete situations, not opinions about oneself.
• Simulation: how the person decides on a realistic business case, under time pressure and with incomplete information.
• 360° references: the view of managers, peers and reports on what the person does, not on what they say they do.

Six dimensions, one success profile

Before anyone is assessed, the success profile of the role is defined: what must this person solve over the next two or three years. The six dimensions of the model, from strategic judgment to integrity and judgement, are weighted against that profile. A CFO and a commercial director are not measured with the same yardstick, even if they share the same framework.

Two assessors, one calibrated reading

All the evidence is calibrated between two senior assessors before the report is written. Calibration reduces the weight of first impressions and forces every score to be justified with observed facts. The result is a scorecard a board can discuss, not an adjective.

After the report

An assessment that ends in a PDF is forgotten. The diagnosis is therefore connected to a development plan and to follow-up at days 30, 60 and 90 in the new role. The decision was the company's; the follow-through is part of the method.