Development and Validation of a Biodata Tool for
Civilian Army Personnel
 The U.S. Army developed the Civilian Leader Improvement Battery (CLIMB)
containing a biographical data Personal Characteristics Inventory (PCI)
 A sample of 320 current employee supervisor pairs we statistically related Biodata
tool supervisor performance ratings.
 Results show the Self-Efficacy, Work Motivations, and Peer Leadership scale
scores had low to moderate relationships to performance on many of the 27
leadership competencies apprised by supervisors.
 The scales combined to account for additional performance variance resulting in a
significant canonical relationship between the PCI and the LEA.
1
Development and Validation of a Biodata Tool for
Civilian Army Personnel
 Originally developed to assess Special Forces leaders for the U.S. Army (Kilcullen,
2006)
 PCI is a rational versus empirical biodata test that measures temperament
characteristics by asking multiple-choice questions about one’s past behavior and
reactions to life events.
 The PCI consists of 72 items for measuring temperament characteristics designed to be
relevant to supervisory job performance. Scales include..,
1) Work Motivation
2) Cognitive Flexibility
3) Peer Leadership
4) Stress Tolerance
5) Social Perceptiveness
6) Team Orientation
7) Self-Efficacy.
2
Development and Validation of a Biodata Tool for
Civilian Army Personnel
Example Items (72 total )
1. How often have your work efforts been blocked by someone who didn't like you?
2. How often have coworkers asked for your help in resolving personal problems?
3. In the past, how confident have you been about your leadership ability when you were placed in charge of a group?
4. How often have you enjoyed working on projects where it was clear that there was not a right or wrong answer?
5. How often were you the one who was asked to organize group projects?
6. How often have you stayed up late several nights to finish a work project?
7. To what extent have changes at work made you uneasy even when they have not directly affected you?
8. How often have you lost time trying to prevent an argument among coworkers?
9. How frequently have you been surprised by events that turned out differently than you expected?
10. I would be able to perform well as a leader in most settings.
3
Development and Validation of a Biodata Tool for
Civilian Army Personnel


Graph 1
Sample CLIMB PCI Score Report for the Stress Tolerance Dimension
Stress Tolerance
X
Expressive
Tends to share emotions
readily . Experiences the
‘lows’ and ‘highs’ more
keenly than others.




Calm
Maintains serene demeanor.
Remains cool and composed
under pressure. Rolls with the
punches without getting upset.
Graph 1 presents an example of a CLIMB PCI score report graph showing how the employee scored (X)
compared to a normative group of civilian supervisors.
The gray box defines the area one standard deviation above and one standard deviation below the mean
for the supervisor sample.
Scale anchors were written to neutrally reflect the characteristic being measured in both high and low
conditions. Hence Stress Tolerance is depicted as a bipolar continuum with “Expressive” on the low end to
“Calm” on the high end.
Employees can see where they fall on the behaviorally anchored continuum compared to other supervisors
and can observe the extent to which they are in the norm or extreme on any characteristic.
4
Correlations, Means, Standard Deviations, and Alphas, for PCI Scale score Ratings and LEA Employee Supervisor Ratings on
27 Competencies (n = 320) Canonical Correlation = .578 (p < .003, 189, 1106)
Employee CLIMB Biodata Scale Scores
S upervisors' Performance
Estimates by Competency
Creativity and Innovation
Continual Learning
External Awareness
Flexibility
Resilience
Service Motivation
Strategic Thinking
Vision
Conflict Management
Integrity Honesty
Leveraging Diversity
Team Building
Accountability
Customer Service
Decisiveness
Entrepreneurship
Problem Solving
Technical Credibility
Financial Management
H R Management
Technology Management
Influencing Negotiating
Interpersonal Skills
Oral Communication
Partnering
Political Savvy
Written Communication
Alpha
Mean
SD
Items
Cognitive S tress
S ocial
Flexibility Tolerance Perceptiveness
*
.141
.096
.112*
.086
.040
.036
.053
.052
.021
.067
.059
.082
.104
-.038
.069
-.016
.070
.115*
.060
.026
.049
.072
.047
-.001
.042
-.001
**
-.005
.178
*
-.004
.119
*
-.021
.135
**
.036
.200
.035
.130*
.023
.063
.050
.145*
**
-.033
.191
.044
.020
-.019
.069
.035
.120*
.080
.033
**
-.039
.179
-.030
.126*
.760
.746
23.54
36.95
4.68
5.50
11
9
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
.016
.077
-.039
.089
.093
.001
.013
-.013
.069
.017
-.012
.051
.009
-.013
.021
-.026
.014
.016
.040
-.009
-.088
.052
.063
.046
.080
-.030
.014
.729
19.73
4.01
8
Team
S elfOrientation Efficacy
**
.178
.172**
.222**
.199**
.168**
**
.153
.149*
.161**
.156**
.108
*
.127
.156**
.162**
.156**
.164**
.095
.181**
.125*
.082
.194**
**
.183
.117*
.133*
.149**
.092
*
.126
.130*
.724
28.83
4.65
9
**
.203
.237**
.215**
.248**
.261**
**
.207
.223**
.261**
.236**
.196**
**
.253
.289**
.286**
.269**
.286**
**
.225
.304**
.222**
.050
.146*
*
.153
.201**
.145**
.210**
.245**
**
.186
.099
.853
39.51
4.93
10
Work
Peer
Motivation Leadership
**
.203
.195**
.227**
.194**
.086
**
.156
.155**
.186**
.105
.186**
**
.159
.158**
.252**
.243**
.226**
**
.195
.246**
.241**
.155*
.193**
**
.260
.143*
.071
.135*
.185**
**
.243
.208**
.647
35.41
4.57
10
**
.350
.334**
.313**
.338**
.293**
**
.259
.252**
.293**
.266**
.283**
**
.275
.300**
.343**
.384**
.390**
**
.321
.360**
.300**
.092
.220**
**
.255
.239**
.239**
.286**
.246**
**
.312
.223**
.752
27.62
4.94
8
5
IVs
DVs
Canonical
Correlation
=
.578 (p < .003)
Personality
Job
Performance
6
360-DEGREE FEEDBACK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Us4zDiHL0Y
What is 360 Degree Feedback
Feedback collected
from
Using a specially designed
tool
Internal
Customers
Peers
External
Customers
Anonymously
“Boss”
Self
Team
Members
360-Degree Feedback
• Provides performance data from multiple points of reference
• More powerful, reliable and accurate as compared to
traditional, single source feedback processes
Not just a performance system
…360-degree feedback should be regarded as an
organizational process rather than a mechanical
tool.
How its being used …….
 Leadership development programs.
 Voluntary feedback
 Team assessments
 Organizational Change
 Assessment of training needs
 Assist performance management
Benefits
For the organisation:
 Promotes constructive feedback and open communication
 Develops a culture of continuous performance improvement
 Builds leadership/ managerial capability
 Embeds values and expected working competencies
 Can be a powerful trigger for change
 Provides feedback about leadership and management ‘strength’
Benefits
For the individual:
 Increased self-awareness
 Discovering the blind spots
 Understanding the strengths and opportunities for development
 Taking ownership and control of own development
 Helps managers to know how to get it ‘right’
Pitfalls
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLFRUI5H0mw
 When used in lieu of performance management, ……
 When “laid” on supervisors …………..
 When requested of skeptical employees, …..
 When not connected to organizational or leadership strategy, ….
 When respondents don’t know how to provide constructive feedback, ……..
 When there is insufficient information, …..
 When the focus is on the negative, ……
 When there is workplace overload, ……..
 When implemented as fad without systemic support …….
 When there is unethical behavior in the organization….
Why are Companies not adopting 360 degree
approach?
 It is costly and time consuming
 Emotional attachment in peers.
 Appraises are not ready to take feedback
 Tend to be somewhat shocking to managers
 Employees desire to “get the boss” or may alternatively “scratch their back”
5 things to consider before you start 360 degree appraisal
1.
Purpose
1.
clarify why and what
2.
communicate to everyone.
2. Culture – are you ready?
1.
Do you have a mature enough team dynamic?
2.
Are you open enough?
3.
Those involved need to feel comfortable & supported.
3. Timing of introduction – also link with the budget and training
planning cycle.
4. Roll out – champion?
1.
How to generate buy-in?
2.
Involve everyone early.
5. Confidentiality for appraisees and raters – non-attributable.