powerpoint presentation · pdf filepredictive index, pi worldwide, and pi are trademarks of...
TRANSCRIPT
PI® Fridays with Bob
“The E Factor” September 28th, 2012
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Good afternoon and thank you for joining me for this edition of PI Friday’s where I’ll be talking about the E factor. I hope you walk away with a better understanding of E than you have now – we’ll just have to see.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Can I get a copy of the slides?
A: Yes. Please download the annotated slides at this link on our website: www.advisausa.com/resources/webinar-archive/
Q: Will a recording of this webinar be made available?
A: By special request on a case-by-case basis.
ADVISA is a PI Worldwide member firm. Predictive Index, PI Worldwide, and PI are trademarks of Praendex Incorporated d/b/a as PI Worldwide in the United States and other countries. Any use without the express written consent of PI Worldwide is strictly prohibited. For a complete listing of PI Worldwide trademarks, please refer to the “Legal Notices” section of www.piworldwide.com.
?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The slide deck from today’s presentation will be available after the session at www.advisausa.com/resources/webinar-archive/. The slides are made available for those of you who might want to review the highlights of today’s presentation. As we do in all of our sessions, we’ll start out with a poll, which you should find coming up on your screen shortly. Our first poll asks you how much you pay attention to the E factor in your current analysis of PI profiles. I’ll be interested in your thoughts. If it’s not up on your screen now, Beth should get it up shortly. Please try to respond quickly so we can feed your answers back to us all. Poll. I use the E Factor in analysis of PI profiles Regularly Sometimes Only when the E is outside the profile Seldom Never Here’s the format, in case you haven’t been with us before. I’ll talk for a while – in this case, for about 15 minutes – and then I’ll do my best to answer the questions that you throw at me. You should see a dialog box on your screen and you can begin writing questions in now or any time during the talk. I’ll use the time left over to try to answer as many questions as I can. While we’ve never run out of time before we’ve run out of questions – there can always be a first time. In any case, we’ll close things down before 1 pm, probably earlier, and you’re always welcome to call or email after the session if there are additional issues you’d like to discuss. Our next session will be a reprise of a session I’ve done previously covering Creativity and it will be at a new time too – 10 am on Friday October 26th. Mark your calendars. It is one of my favorite PI topics and during it you’ll find how we all best get our creative juices flowing. Let’s see if 85% of you have responded and take a look at your answers to today’s poll. Excellent. Thank you for your response. Surprised? Let’s get into the topic and see if it makes sense to change your answer by the time we’re done.
The E Factor: The Impact of Judgment on Drives
Low E’s - like Dr. McCoy in the original Star Trek series High E’s - like Spock Average E’s - like Captain Kirk
Presenter
Presentation Notes
I have to confess that it took several years for me to get a grip on understanding the E Factor. When I first went through PI training as a sales and marketing manager with Arnold Daniels’ son Stephen, he described E as having an impact on a person’s judgment. Low E’s tended to be subjective and high E’s tended to be objective. Low E’s tended to be more emotional and high E’s tended to be more logical. Stephen used the analogy that Low E’s were like McCoy in the original Star Trek series (the only one around in 1984 when I went through training) – using their “guts” to make decisions; where high E’s were more like Spock – cold and logical in their decision-making. Low E’s tended to see the world through “rose-colored glasses”; sometimes having an unrealistic perception of themselves in relation to the world. High E’s could find it very difficult to understand the feelings of others. People with average E’s were more like Kirk – rational in their decision making.The E factor was taken from E words that were on both the self and self-concept word lists. That is, there were E words that were A words, B words, etc. and E was another tally but only considered in synthesis (which was pretty clear, because when I started in 1986 a PI was scored from a paper check list with a stencil – you actually had to count all the words.) The way E was explained to me all kind of made sense and was interesting but that was the last I thought about E for the next couple of years. It just wasn’t part of my thought process. Then, I bought the license to consult with PI and went through another training class with Arnold, the founder of the business. I recall his description of E was about the same as Stephens and that was that.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
I sold my first couple of deals and started to do PI training on my own - largely following the outline used by the people who had trained me. The only significant difference between how I was trained twice by the Daniels family and how I trained others was this: I had the companies go into training with the profiles of all, or at least 100 of the people that they worked with. I did this because I thought it could preclude some of the mistakes I had made. You see, both times when I was trained I only had 2 or 3 profiles to look at as the (at that time) 4-day course progressed. I thought the training was wonderful. It was truly a life-changing experience. But, I didn’t have enough data to go back to work and make the right decisions. I spent most of my time when using PI going with decisions that I thought were right – frequently going against the decisions suggested by PI – and getting burned. It seemed like I’d do a much better job of getting people to buy in to PI and thus not make the dumb decisions I did if they had the profiles of their people with them so they could test the system in the class – where mistakes didn’t cost anything. This whole process taught me a ton about PI. Some of which agreed with what I was taught. Some didn’t. The E Factor, was one where I generally didn’t get buy-in from attendees in the class. I’d find examples of both Lowest E and Highest E profiles and go through the Star Trek analogy and more often than not received the response of, “I don’t see it.” It didn’t take long for me to simply gloss over the E Factor. Empirical evidence said it didn’t seem like it had any significant meaning. Two specific consulting events happened that changed my perspective. Before going in to those experiences, let’s take another poll about where your E factor is. Poll. My E factor is: Highest High Average Low Lowest I have no idea My own E Factor is a tad on the high side, though given that I have a wide-spread profile, it really could be described as average. I think if you asked people to guess where my E factor is, most would say it’s very high, perhaps outside the profile. But, it’s not. I think the cause of that is what I’ll be talking about for the duration of this session – my profile has a highest A and a B just above norm but 2 sigmas below my A. So, my profile would say I’m a pretty logical, data driven person. My E probably doesn’t have a whole lot of influence on that, other than to say that for someone with a profile like mine, I have a pretty balanced approach on the scale of a logical to emotional decision maker. We’ll get back to that in a bit. Please fill in your answers on the poll and as soon as we get to 85%, I’ll feed the answers back to you… OK. Here’s what we’ve got. Let’s get back to the E discussion.
Case #1: The manager who couldn’t connect with employees
Control pattern with high E factor
Presenter
Presentation Notes
I would try to visit with my clients on a regular basis and when I did, I’d try to look at what was working and what wasn’t; answer questions and help to solve problems. On one such visit, the client was a manufacturing company that found they liked the control profile (as well as a couple of others) managing their floor operations. The president leafed through his gigantic 3-ring binder to one foreman they’d recently hired and told me, “This guy just isn’t working. He’s a control just like another half dozen guys we’ve hired, but he just can’t connect with any of our people. What do you think is the problem?” His self-concept wasn’t anything weird. It was a very similar profile to a number of the other folks who worked very well. The president then pointed out the E Factor which was significantly high and asked, “Do you suppose this means anything?” I didn’t know.
Lower E’s • were much more likely to connect with the people around them • came across behaving as high B’s – much friendlier than their
profile would indicate • were not seen as impulsive or emotional. High, especially highest, E’s • seen as being very cool, sometimes cold and definitely very logical
– frequently having difficulty seeing the “people” side of things. • not very effective at leading people or clearly weren’t being
considered to do that. They seemed too aloof.
We compared every Control profile throughout the organization:
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We eventually pulled out every similar control profile throughout the organization and laid them out according to where they sat on the E scale – from lowest E’s to highest and all the places in between. I didn’t know any of the people but he and his HR manager did. This wasn’t just foreman, but included engineers, office people – everyone. They were wowed by what they saw. People with lower E’s were much more likely to connect with the people around them. Lowest Es even came across behaving as high B’s – much friendlier than their profile would indicate. The low E’s, however, were not seen as impulsive or emotional. In contrast, the high and especially the highest Es were seen as being very cool, sometimes cold and definitely very logical – frequently having difficulty seeing the people side of things. And the highest E’s were either not very effective at leading people or clearly weren’t being considered to do that. They seemed too aloof. Hmmm. Looking across a series of Control profiles the E factor seemed to predict a relative warmth or coldness. Low E’s didn’t seem to be emotional or impulsive, but high E’s did seem to be logical and objective. Some of what was taught to me was beginning to make sense. But, some wasn’t. It didn’t take long for the next piece of the puzzle to fall into place.
Persuasive with Low E Factor
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Again, I was on a regular client visit reviewing the profiles of a large group of field sales managers who had been hired with the president and sales manager. They were hiring both persuasives and authoritatives for this role which was a hybrid of a salesman and a sales manager. They were essentially working team leaders who handled some large accounts as well as mentored and managed about a half dozen sales people. Again, the difference was the E factor. Those who had failed (and in this instance had been fired) were all lowest Es. And in the discussion with the company leaders revealed that some of the problems were around their gut-level decisions. Additionally, they looked at the world through rose-colored glasses – their promises and forecasts were unrealistic – getting them into problems both with operations and clients. Sometimes they even got emotional and / or heated in interactions where there was pressure. As we pulled out the profiles of higher E managers, we didn’t see them really being aloof or cold – except in relation to the lower E folks. These were, after all, high B people – people who need to connect with and feel positive about others.
Spock • lowest B • highest E • sci-pro
Dr. McCoy • lowest E • altruistic server
Captain Kirk • average E • authoritative
Presenter
Presentation Notes
My problems with the E understanding the E factor were that I couldn’t see it in the context of the profile. The Star Trek explanation made sense in describing E, but the profiles of the characters were all different too – confounding my ability to understand. The E factor can only be understood in the context of the profile of the person in question. Looking at E out of this context is only confusing.
The E factor can only be evaluated in relationship to the profile. It can’t be evaluated on its’ own.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
From this point forward, and this was probably 4 years into being a consultant, I started looking for ranges of E’s in the same self-profile; looking for one or two examples where I could show the same profile from lowest, to low, to average, to high to highest E. And, that’s the point, by listening to what clients said that I really began to understand the E factor. The most important part of this learning is captured on the slide you’re looking at: The E factor can only be understood in relationship to the profile in question. The impact of a highest E in a control profile is significantly different in terms of the behaviors it generates to a highest E in an altruistic server or persuasive. In both of those highest B profiles, the person develops some level of empathy as a result of their highest B. Are they as warm as another Highest B with a low or lowest E? No. But, you’re going to find them warmer (or at least as warm) as a control with a lowest E. On the other side of the spectrum, the lowest E control isn’t going to be as warm as a highest E persuasive or altruistic server. The E can only be seen and understood in relation to the profile itself. This ongoing evaluation of the E factor taught me a lot more about it, how and where to use it and when to pay attention to it. There is much behavioral information and understanding to be gotten from the E factor. Before going any further into what I’ve learned over the years about the E factor, let’s find out some more information from you with another poll – this one about your using the E factor in the hiring process. Poll. I use the E factor in hiring: Always Sometimes Seldom Never Here at Advisa, we have hired people with E factors spanning the spectrum – from highest to lowest E and everywhere in between. We’ve had lowest E consultants and highest E hiring partners and internal staff. And in each case, wherever the person’s E was, that part of their profile helped provide a piece of the puzzle to a part of their behavior. In my own family, the range is again, all over the board. My mother is a highest E. One of my cousins is a lowest E. A second cousin is something you don’t see very often – a highest E persuasive – and that explains a significant amount of his behavior. The E factor is always an interesting point of analysis regardless of how much we actually use it. Let’s see what we’ve got on our survey. Let’s get up to 85%. Just a couple more clicks. There we go. Thank you. Here’s what you’ve said you do with the E factor in hiring…
Personal Space
President Lyndon Johnson Seinfeld TV show: “Close Talker”
Presenter
Presentation Notes
One of the interesting aspects of E is how it relates to peoples view of personal space. Obviously, this has cultural implications, but one of the things people noticed about the E factors of their own folks is that the lower the E, the closer people like to be with each other when they’re communicating. Often, Lowest E’s like to touch while talking. When highest E’s are very uncomfortable when people get in their space. Often, people have found that they like to be separated by a desk from other people. One of the more interesting examples quoted by a person in training was about a person whose E was one sigma high outside the profile. He lived alone in rural Indiana and posted signs around his property saying “Trespassers may be shot” and kept a loaded gun nearby – just in case.
As the E increases, we perceive higher D and lower B behaviors.
As the E decreases, we perceive higher B and lower D behaviors
D B
D
B
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Again, this is only in relationship to the overall profile, but as the E goes from average to high to highest, we’ll tend to perceive the person as having higher D and lower B behaviors. Higher E’s will tend to be harder to connect with and their logical, more rigid approach to problem solving and understanding of situations creates the perception that they might be higher D’s and lower B’s than what their profile would actually suggest. Conversely, as the E goes from average to low to lowest, we’ll tend to perceive the person as having higher B and lower D behaviors than what the profile would indicate. They’ll be warmer and more flexible in their decision making than what you might otherwise expect. In both instances, the E factor doesn’t implicate the needs of the drives. It only alters how we perceive a person’s behavior.
Lowest E combined with highest D
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The combination of lowest E with highest D has really been an interesting one to explore with those people who have it. One of the traits that are common to lowest E’s in general is that they tend to be impulse buyers. They see something they like and their gut tells them, “Buy it!” I’ve had several highest D’s tell me they create mechanisms to control this impulse to keep from making that kind of mistake. One said he either goes shopping with his wife or leaves his credit card at home. Several with this combination of factors have talked about how they do jump to conclusions when faced with choices. However, their highest D forces them to “prove” that the conclusion they jumped to is the right one by doing all the proper investigation. The E factor has to be looked at in the context of the profile you’re evaluating.
Does the E change over time?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Once I finally came to understand the E factor, I started wondering about if the E changed. It is, after all, a resultant factor – that is, it is a result of the combination of both the self and self-concept profiles. Therefore, it should follow that the E factor should change as the self-concept changes. The first challenge, however, is around how you would measure that. Hybrid profiles don’t consider the E (when added by AccessPI). To measure how the E changed, you would need to add the E words from the original self-profile to the most recent E words from self-concept, and even in the days when I started and had to count the words, the actual check lists generally didn’t get saved. This was a problem. So, I called the guru himself, Arnold, and we talked about it. Arnold told me that the E factor probably did change especially with maturity, but we just don’t have a way of measuring it. Arnold believed that the E tended to come back to the norm as people matured. My experience differed. After 26+ years of consulting with PI and looking at profiles and watching people, I’ve come to the opposite conclusion to Arnold. It appears to me that the E factor is similar to the self-profile. I don’t think it changes much. People who were lowest E’s 20 years ago still look at the world the same way today they did then. I find the same is true of highest E’s. As it is with people whose E’s are average. That part of behavior that is measure by E seems to stick with people throughout life.
E Factors of Famous People
President Richard Nixon President Jimmy Carter
Presenter
Presentation Notes
For me, partly because I’m kind of a political junky, the best analogy of E differences relates to Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. On the one hand, they were both very control oriented presidents. Readings about both of them centered in how they tended to micro manage their worlds. While Nixon was likely a higher A than D and Carter an A/D conflict, their profiles were, in all likelihood, pretty similar – high A and D, low B and C. The differences between them that could have been measure by PI were likely all in the E Factor. Carter was likely a low, or even a lowest E – very warm, approachable, connected relatively easily with people and seemed comfortable talking close up to people. Nixon on the other hand, was notoriously cold, did not warm up to people, was rigid in his thoughts and decisions – likely a highest E.
E Factors of Famous People (cont.)
President Bill Clinton
Presenter
Presentation Notes
While it’s not clear Jimmy Carter is a lowest E, it sure does seem likely that Bill Clinton is one. He reads people very well. He connects very easily. And he did have (at least once) the propensity to believe everything he said – very much looking at the world through his own rose colored glasses.
So, where should we use the E factor?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
From my perspective, the E factor brings its greatest value in understanding behaviors that are sometimes contrary to the profile. Sometimes when you see lowest B’s who are very outgoing and friendly, you find, voila, the E factor is quite low. An IT person almost seems to have a force field around his cube and again, voila, you see a highest E on a SciPro profile. It helps explain behavior. In the hiring process, I think you’re best to use the E very sparingly – primarily as a potential flagging device. Highest E low B high D profiles can have issues connecting with people. Make sure they prove that they can before you hire them into a people facing role. Lowest E Low D people can be pretty quick on the decision making trigger. Again, if you see a lowest E low D applying for a role where decisions are being made, I’d check into their references to verify that the person in question is not cut from the “ready, fire, aim” cloth. I wouldn’t recommend using the E factor as a screen in the hiring process unless you’ve clearly proven to yourself through experience it should be. As I’ve mentioned previously, we’ve had highest E’s in customer facing roles that were excellent performers. And we’ve had lowest E’s in consultant roles that were also excellent performers. At most, the E should raise a flag to look a little deeper in your evaluation process. The E factor is very interesting and does provide some good insight. On the other hand, it is the one single measure in PI that is probably, justifiably used the least. There just isn’t that much you can do with it beyond respond, “That’s interesting” when you watch the behaviors play out that it predicts. And that is interesting – at least to me.
Join us next month: 10 a.m. October 21st
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Thank you for listening. Beth is getting our final poll up about your feelings regarding today’s session, so please take a minute and let us know your thoughts. Poll. How would you best describe today’s PI Friday’s with Bob? 1.Loved it! Looking forward to the next one and will recommend it to others. 2.It was pretty good. I’ll probably be back. 3.Not very helpful. I might listen again. 4.Didn’t like it. Won’t be back. Feel free to post additional comments in your comment box so we can gain from your experience. Our next session as mentioned previously, will be a reprise of a session covering Creativity. Remember, it will be at a new time too – 10 am on Friday October 26th. Mark your calendars. Now, let’s get to your questions.