Effektiv rekrytering inom detaljhandeln

Under 2013 har Elgiganten på bred front implementerat cut-e‘s tester till sin butiksrekrytering. Med 50 000 sökanden har arbetspsykologiska test stor potential att både effektivisera och öka kvaliteten i rekryteringsprocersserna. En av de mest centrala tjänsterna är butikssäljare. I början av samarbetet samlade cut-e in data kring personlighetsdimensioner, begåvning/färdighet och försäljningsresultat för flera hundra befintliga butikssäljare, både i Sverige och internationellt. Analysen visade på tydliga samband som ligger till grund för skräddarsydda rapporter. Varuhuscheferna använder dem i sitt rekryteringsarbete för att veta vilka kandidater som har rätt personliga egenskaper för framgångsrik försäljning – och vilka som saknar dem.

I förra veckan höll cut-e ett fullsatt fullsatt frukostseminarium på Stockholm Waterfront Congress Centre tillsammans med Elgiganten. Under seminariet presenterades hur arbetet mellan Elgiganten och cut-e har gått till. Du som missade seminariet eller vill veta mer kan ladda ner case studyn här.

Tack till alla gamla och nya kontakter och kunder som deltog i seminariet.

Pssst… du har väl inte missat cut-e’s nyhetsbrev? Maila till info.sweden@cut-e.com om du vill ta del av vårt nyhetsbrev som innehåller nyheter, inbjudan till event och mycket mer!

How everyday experiences shape personality

Some time ago, we asked the question what turns someone into a hero or a villain and we learned that situations matter and that there is nothing like a “good” or “bad” personality per se. These results can be generalised to the question: how stable is our personality? It seems that situations we experience at work on one day have quite an impact on how we describe ourselves the next day.

 

Timothy A. Judge from University of Notre Dame and University College LondonLauren S. Simon from Portland State UniversityCharlice Hurst from Western University, and Ken Kelley from University of Notre Dame studied personality and everyday experiences of 122 employees over a period of two weeks (ten working days). They had participants record their daily experiences at work and rate themselves on instruments assessing the Big Five personality traits (extraversion, neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness to experience) at the end of each day.
The key findings were:

 

  • Individuals who displayed more citizenship behaviour (behaviours such as helping others or doing things that are not required but help the organisation) on one day described themselves as more extraverted, agreeable, and open the next day. I
  • Interpersonal conflict and neuroticism seemed to enforce each other, meaning that when someone experienced conflict on one day, scores on neuroticism were likely to be higher on the next day, but also when someone described him- or herself as neurotic one day, he or she was more likely to experience conflict the subsequent day.
  • Goal setting motivation enforced conscientiousness on the following day, but also conscientiousness strengthened goal setting motivation on the subsequent day.
  • Intrinsic motivation on one day positively predicted conscientiousness and openness on the following day, with openness and intrinsic motivation also being in a mutual relationship.
  • Conflicts in one day negatively affected openness and agreeableness on the next day in individuals that scored high on neuroticism. However, this was not the case for emotionally stable individuals.

 

The original article was published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. There is an outline of the study on the BPS Occupational Digest blog.

 

The results do not mean that there is nothing stable in our personality. Rather, they imply that personality varies around a kind of certain set point. For some people, e.g. people scoring higher on neuroticism, this variation may be greater than for others. The research presented here, as the BPS Research Digest puts it, “helps us better understand virtuous cycles, where one good turn produces the state that can lead to another, and keeps us aware of the power of dynamics in a working environment”.

 

Smile

Please do because it is quite likely to be good for you. Researchers connect smiling to success and well-being, longevity, health, and even positive perception by others.

In a TED Talk, speaker, writer and entrepreneur Ron Gutman gives an overview of research around the benefits of smiling.
In a 30 year longitudinal study researchers predicted how fulfilling and long-lasting subjects’ marriages would be, what scores they would have in standardised tests of well-being and how inspiring they would be to others from their smiles in a college yearbook. In another study, the span of a smile predicted longevity – the bigger the smile, the longer subjects’ lives.

Smiling seems to be inborn: babies are born smiling and smile a lot while sleeping and also while being awake. It seems to be universal to cultures and people across all cultures are able to distinguish a true from a fake smile. The act of smiling already makes us feel better and stimulates our reward system in the brain in such a way that even chocolate is not able to.

Smiling even can make us healthier. It can reduce the level of stress hormones and raise the level of mood enhancing hormones. Furthermore, it can reduce blood pressure. Finally, it can also make us look more likeable, but also more competent.

How come smiling has such a positive impact on our health, well-being and success in life? Smiling is an indicator that the individual is in a positive emotional state. Thus, maybe the research on positive emotions can explain many of the findings. For example, we know that a certain relation of positive to negative emotions (3:1) makes us flourishThere is also research indicating that happiness makes us successful in building our careers. And, finally, we know that well-being is related to health and longevity.

Thus, do what Ron Gutman suggests at the end of his talk: SMILE :-)

Are we getting smarter?

Many of our readers may be familiar with the Flynn effect, or the massive increase in IQ test performance that has been measured during the last 80 years. Compared to people who lived in the early 1900s, we would be highly gifted, whereas they, compared to us, would be classified as mentally retarded. What is the reason for this gain in IQ test performance? Are we really getting smarter?

James R. Flynn, who has been studying this effect intensely, gives some ideas on what the reasons for the massive change in IQ test performance are: our minds have changed from dealing with a very concrete world to dealing with increasingly complex and abstract information.

Thus, his key message is that today’s world faces us with completely different challenges than it did in the early 20th century. Sometimes we deal with these by simply using improved aides. For example, when firing a gun, people have become better, but not so much because their ability to meet a target has improved, but because they are using better guns. Thus, increases in performance can very well result from using other, better instruments.

However, as already mentioned above, what has definitely changed in the last 80 years is the content we are dealing with. In the early 20th century, the Russian neurologist Alexander Luria studied people in rural Russia and found that they were unable to hypothesise and to think in abstract categories. However, today, this is what we deal with all the time: classification, using logic on abstractions, taking the hypothetical seriously. At school and at university, we are trained to classify objects, to use logic on abstractions, and to take the hypothetical seriously. Furthermore, today, many of us execute highly complex jobs that are cognitively demanding, and we can only meet the requirements of these jobs if we are cognitively highly flexible. Thus, today, we take the abstract and hypothetical seriously and look for logical connections between objects. In Jim Flynn’s opinion, these are the major reasons for the massive gains in IQ test performance that have been measured across the last 80 years.

In line with this is the finding that the gains have been greatest in certain areas: classification and using logic and abstractions. However, we have not make progress on all fronts. Young people nowadays do not read history or literature. This is, in Jim Flynn’s opinion, a dangerous tendency. How do young people want to make politics when they have no idea about it and about history? This brings us back to the question we discussed in a previous post: where lies the future of learning? How can we make young people learn in a way that they can deal with our complex world? Sugata Mitra would say: make them curious, ask them questions, and then let them explore themselves!

The positive side of negative emotions

Many of our posts here on cut-e Scienceblog are on Positive Psychology, Positive Emotions, or Positive Health. This reflects the current trend in research, with lots of studies on the beneficial effect of positive emotions and happiness on health, career, and even society. However, it would be a great mistake to say that positive emotions are always good and negative emotions are always bad. It seems rather that both play important roles in our lives.

On the Association for Psychological Science (APS) website, Eric Jaffe outlines some of the research that looks at the positive side of negative emotions or unhappiness. For example, psychologist June Gruber of Yale University reviewed research on the flip side of happiness. One study in this line of research found that our striving for happiness in Western cultures often comes at the cost of becoming lonely. Social connections seem to suffer when we pursue happiness too much. This is paradoxical because a wide range of research shows that it is exactly our social connections that make us happy.

Furthermore, as the review shows, positive emotions are not appropriate in each and every situation. When having to evaluate information critically, it seems that positive emotions make us gullible, whereas negative ones put us into the mind state that is necessary for really evaluating the information at hand critically. Negative emotions also seem to be beneficial for memory, forceful persuasion, and avoiding the fundamental attribution error (the tendency to overestimate the effect of disposition or personality and underestimate the effect of the situation in explaining social behavior). Finally, researchers found that accepting a negative emotional state is more beneficial for our mental health than actively struggling against it. This is, by the way, also what meditation and mindfulness practice teaches us.

Eric Jaffe comes to the conclusion that universally striving for happiness and positive emotions is not beneficial at all and that we ought to acknowledge that both – positive and negative emotions – have their place in our lives and are appropriate in some situations, whereas in others they are not. Moreover, too much happiness (like too much of almost anything in the world) is not good, but the secret lies in moderation. Finally, emotional stability seems to be very important for life satisfaction.

These ideas reflect some of the research we reported in previous posts: For example, Shigehiro Oishi, Ed Diener, and Richard E. Lucas found that “that people who experience the highest levels of happiness are the most successful in terms of closerelationships and volunteer work, but that those who experience slightly lower levels of happiness are the most successful in terms of income, education, and political participation.” Activating negative moods can enhance our creativity. Adversity can make us stronger. Too much optimism makes it difficult to adjust false beliefs And, finally, as already stated above, actively seeking happiness instead of meaning does not necessarily make us happier.

Thus, both positive and negative emotions are there for a reason. We should accept them both instead of intensively pursuing happiness and struggling to avoid unhappiness. Emotional stability and a moderate level of happiness are just as important to our well-being as social connections are.

Skrivet av: http://cut-e-science.blogspot.se/