What factors should you consider when selecting a group leadership assessment tool?

First of all , do not start with a tool; Instead start with what you want to measure and why. Once the purpose and competencies are signed up - finalize the budgets, time that the team is willing to spend on it, agree on commitment to action planning on the reports. With all this in the bag - look for a tool that is easy to use - enabling anytime assesments; with low dependence on assessors ( people) and the one with clean and easy to understand reporting with the right level of details and anonymity as needed.

In terms of purpose and scope, this must be spelled out for the tool to be useful and valuable to the individual being assessed and the organisation deploying the assessment. The tool that I had deployed in the past was focused on measuring the effectiveness of supervisors and leaders in the organisation. By effectiveness, we wanted to know the impact of their leadership style on the performance of their direct reports and teams. If their team members were meeting and/or exceeding expectations, it meant that there was a need to sustain that leadership behaviour that was producing this good or great result for the team; otherwise, the leader would be placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP).

Ensure that whatever the assessment is measuring that it aligns to the competency model on which leaders are evaluated, trained, selected, held accountable to, etc. If the assessment doesn't measure the knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics that are necessary to do one's job, then what are we doing here? :)

One of my favorite things to do as a Senior Leadership Development professional is administering leadership group assessments. Assessments are great predictors for success at the junior and senior management level. In selecting an assessment tool, it is critical that you start with the end in mind. Good questions to keep in the back of your mind are: Who are you assessing? Why are you assessing them? What skills and competencies are you looking for in the candidate? How will you measure these competencies? What instruments will you be using to measure the competencies?

At the truly senior level, most leaders are jaded by having used many different assessment tools (some multiple times) to little effect. Whatever the group chooses, or has chosen for them, needs to cut through the cynicism. A strong driving 'top leader', subtle enough to bring other leaders with her / him but with the gravitas & credibility to make it clear that this time it's different (!), is essential. Simple messages. This is the purpose of what we're doing. Here's the scope. By the end of the year, we all need to be working differently (me included).

In my view, the tool must have minimal questions with valid and reliable results. In the fast paced world of today, brevity is the key.

When evaluating assessment tools, it's crucial to prioritize validity and reliability. Validity is the litmus test for whether the tool effectively measures what it claims to measure. Without it, the data collected may not accurately reflect your capabilities, potentially leading you astray in your efforts to improve. Reliability ensures that the tool consistently delivers accurate results, regardless of what is assessed. You can depend on the data generated, providing a solid foundation for making informed decisions. Selecting a group leadership assessment tool with solid validity and reliability is like having a trustworthy compass. With them, you can avoid veering off course and investing valuable resources in ineffective strategies.

If you don't have training in psychometrics, you shouldn't try to evaluate the validity and reliability of an assessment on your own. Instead, hire an I-O psychologist who specializes in assessment to act as your broker. Explain what you're trying to measure and your "broker" will search both academic and business sources to find a solution that meets your needs and fits the psychometric bill. This is less expensive than you think and is one area where a middleman can add great value.

Not everyone realizes that scientific validation and reliability studies are done on legitimate assessments of this nature. Gallup's CliftonStrengths and DiSC are among the most popular and scientifically accurate assessment you can find, while other popular assessments like MBTI (Myers-Briggs) have never actually received validity and reliability scores. Assessments can be fun, but they can also do more harm than good if they aren't valid/reliable and used properly in your organization.

While validity and reliability can be important. This depends highly on the objective (see previous paragraph). To get to a well validated and reliable set of questions, requires quite some (academic) research. The challenge is that for organizations, you often want a set of questions that is specific to your organization (structure/strategy/values/leadership model. This might mean you have to measure things that have not been measured (in the same way or context) before. This means there are less or no validated questions to reuse. If, on the other hand, you want to have validated questions that are well researched and proven to work, you might have to settle for questions that are less tailored to your organization.

The best tool that I have witnessed is designed like a 360-degree assessment tool. It solicits feedback from the leader's line manager, peers, direct reports, and external clients and vendors in addition to self-assessment. The tool is also deployed online in order to mask the identities of the respondents, making it difficult to pin down the feedback of one of the survey participants.

Format and delivery are pivotal when selecting assessment tools. How you administer the tool and receive results can significantly impact its utility. Your choices should align with your specific goals and organizational context. There are many assessment tools available, all with different benefits, and they’re not one-size-fits-all. Consider the duration of the feedback process. Quick results and actionable insights are essential for timely improvements, but longer feedback processes may provide deeper insights. Clarity in result presentation and interpretation can ensure that the outcomes can be transformed into meaningful action plans. Cater the format and delivery of your tool to your development and leadership needs and situations.

I find a lot of tools do a great job of highlighting strengths and weaknesses, and it feels like I’ve tried so many of them. They are even great at showing where you complement each other. But that’s not the same as breaking down barriers between team members which is much better done in real life by experiencing things together or solving things together that are not purely theoretical.

Here a lot also depends on the comfort of the organisation. Some organisations may be widely distributed but in person assessments are non negotiable. Having a mix of tools - in person and online + 360 degree feedback is good

Agreed with prior comments on 360s aligned with critical leadership competencies - this can support buy-in/credibility as well as accuracy since ratings are aggregated and contrasted from multiple perspectives. Downside is that having multiple raters complicates reporting and drawing firm conclusions. A DiSC or similar (self-report, a few broad competencies/traits assessed) would be quicker.

When assessing cost and value in group leadership assessment tools, keep these points in mind: 1. Evaluate how improved leadership impacts your team and organization. A slightly higher-cost tool that delivers substantial results can be a wise investment. 2. Look past the initial cost. Consider scalability, adaptability, and ongoing support that contribute to sustained growth. 3. Flexibility is Key: Can the tool be customized to your specific needs? Tailoring can enhance value by addressing unique requirements. 4. User-Friendly Tools: A tool that is intuitive and user-friendly can save time and resources, enhancing its overall value. These factors can help you make informed choices and align tools with your long-term goals and success.

💰💎 Balancing the cost and value of your chosen group leadership assessment tool is crucial. Assess the tool's price tag in relation to the benefits it offers and whether it aligns with your budget and expected outcomes. Consider additional features or services such as support, coaching, training, or benchmarking. Comparing the tool with similar options in terms of quality, effectiveness, and reputation is vital. Ultimately, choose a tool that provides high value for your investment, meeting or exceeding your standards and expectations.

Aim for a balance between affordability and richness of insights. A costlier tool can offer greater value if it leads to significant improvements. I recommend considering the following: 1. Scope of Assessment vs Cost: A higher cost may be justifiable if the tool covers a comprehensive range of competencies with actionable insights 2. Impact on Leadership Development 3. Time Efficiency: A more expensive tool that delivers rapid insights can be more cost-effective 4. Scalability: Is the cost scalable for your organisation? 5. User Experience: An engaging tool can result in higher completion rates and better quality data 6. After-Service Support: More expensive tools that offer extensive support might present greater value

When choosing a group leadership assessment tool, feedback and improvement help create a culture of continuous improvement. Look for tools that not only identify strengths and weaknesses but also provide actionable insights and recommendations tailored to your unique context. It should foster open dialogue among team members, support long-term progress tracking, and offer resources for learning and development. Customizability, stakeholder involvement, data security, and user-friendliness are vital considerations. Valuable assessment tools also support learning, offering educational materials, workshops, or coaching. These resources can enhance the impact of the assessment by providing practical guidance for improvement.

Unless a tool can offer actionable insights that align with your team's commitment to continuous improvement and striving towards excellence in leadership, it's not worth the investment. Choose a tool that not only pinpoints areas for growth but also facilitates a culture of open dialogue and feedback. The tool should provide a clear path from assessment to action, with concrete steps for development, and a way to track progress over time. Choose a resource that supports and nurtures long-term leadership development. Some tools let you do follow-up checks at regular intervals, which is great for seeing how things change. In my work with clients, this comes in handy because we can actually see the difference from one survey to the next.

In understanding what you want to achieve with an assessment tool, you also need to consider how you will use the information gathered from the assessment. Assessing a tool based on the quality and quantifiable findings you'll be able to gather is key. Then, you'll need to ensure you're finding ways to integrate the learnings into the culture of the organization. As an example, if your team does the Strengths Finder exercise, ensure that you're taking strengths into consideration as you assign projects, promote individuals, or give feedback; create opportunities in 1:1s to talk about how these strengths are showing up and how they can be boosted to have even more impact.

I did the Semco Style Institute Selfie the other day with my team, and will use it with my leadership development clients. Why? It's built on/from an agile framework. It aligns with the foundation pieces of a learning organization. I like it because it covers, not only individuals, but the team, and the organizational culture. It's an amazing tool.

When we evaluate the cost of an assessment effort, we naturally focus on the cost of the instrument itself. In reality, the most expensive and time-consuming aspect of the process occurs after the debrief: facilitating behavior change. Budget time and resources for helping participants set specific, measurable goals, follow up, and maybe even some coaching. It's a lot of work, but if you're not changing behavior, what is the point of the assessment to begin with?

One last thing to consider is your likelihood of sustaining focus on an assessment. Some assessments that are the most value-adding (like Gallup's CliftonStrengths) take longer to internalize and implement. If you're not willing to implement over the long-term, a simple assessment like DiSC might be a better solution for your organization.

While all the above mentioned pointers are required to make the right choice of the tool, I feel the foremost step is to bring the team onboard with the idea of such inputs/feedback. While the tool may indicate certain behaviour(s) that needs to be changed or improved upon, it is not 100% directly applicable and needs to be contextualised for your organisation and it’s culture. Hence the leaders need to be open to accept the results (with a pinch of salt) and be willing and ready to change for a better version of themselves and the organisation as a whole.

Certain assessment tools may lack cultural sensitivity and thus be unsuitable for diverse organizations. They should be rigorously vetted to prevent bias. For instance, Japanese leadership, which values group harmony, might yield atypical results on tools based on individualistic, low-context Western norms. Interpret such findings with caution before acting.

My number one recommendation for anyone looking at assessment tools, especially for leadership development, is to find one that provides quantitative measurement of behavior and skill. While it’s okay to also include qualitative and self-assessment metrics as well, being able to provide people with feedback into the specific behaviors and skills they need to develop will pay dividends. Add to that, one of the biggest challenges for leadership development is standing up to the “so what?” test. When you’re able to quantifiably measure behavior and skill, you can quantifiably show an improvement in those behaviors and skills, which gives credibility to the assessment as well as any development opportunities you’re including in the program.

Cultural norms can produce misleading results so use caution or don't use. For example, the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument has 5 styles (competing, avoiding, accommodating, collaborating and compromising). These describe the outcome, not the process. Processes reflect the cultural norms and could be indirect communication, using 3rd-person intermediaries, group consensus, etc. The questions on the TKI often describe a process that is misidentified as "compromise" or "avoidance".