June 24, 2025 • 24 mins
Ever wonder why someone with a stellar resume struggles in their new role? Or why another employee with modest credentials becomes your top performer? The answer lies in understanding that people are more than their professional history.
The Bosshole Chronicles takes you on a journey through the powerful "Head, Heart, and Briefcase" model—a framework that transforms how leaders view, select, and develop their team members. This flashback episode unpacks the whole person approach to talent optimization that can keep you firmly out of The Bosshole Zone.
HERE ARE MORE RESOURCES FROM REAL GOOD VENTURES:
Never miss a good opportunity to learn from a bad boss...
Click HERE to get your very own Reference Profile. We use The Predictive Index as our analytics platform, so you know it's validated and reliable. Your Reference Profile informs you of your needs, behaviors, and the nuances of what we call your Behavioral DNA. It also explains your work style, your strengths, and even the common traps in which you may find yourself. It's a great tool to share with friends, family, and co-workers.
Follow us on Instagram HERE and make sure to share with your network!
Follow us on Twitter HERE and make sure to share with your network!
Provide your feedback HERE, please! We love to hear from our listeners and welcome your thoughts and ideas about how to improve the podcast and even suggest topics and ideas for future episodes.
Visit us at www.realgoodventures.com. We are a Talent Optimization consultancy specializing in people and business execution analytics. Real Good Ventures was founded by Sara Best and John Broer who are both Certified Talent Optimization Consultants with over 50 years of combined consulting and organizational performance experience. Sara is also certified in EQi 2.0. RGV is also a Certified Partner of Line-of-Sight, a powerful organizational health and execution platform. RGV is known for its work in leadership development, executive coaching, and what we call organizational rebuild where we bring all our tools together to diagnose an organization's present state and how to grow toward a stronger future state.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
John Broer (00:08):
All right, folks, we're introducing a new type of
episode for The Bossh oleChronicles.
We're calling it a TBC thatstands for The Bossh ole
Chronicles, a TBC flashback ofan episode we dropped a couple
of years ago about head, heartand briefcase.
Head, heart and briefcase isour terminology for what we call
(00:30):
the whole person model.
Managers, supervisors, cannotlook at one single aspect of an
individual.
A lot of times it's just theperformance, or it's a person's
resume, or, as we call it, thebriefcase.
No, you have to look at thewhole person head, heart and
briefcase and the behavioral andcognitive data that we get from
(00:50):
our platform that lives in thehead, but that only tells part
of the story.
So if you are looking to stayout of the boss hole zone and
understand the best way todevelop, guide and grow your
direct reports, you've got tounderstand the whole person
model.
And so here's a littleflashback of an episode we
dropped a few years ago aboutHead, heart and Briefcase.
(01:12):
The Bossh ole Chronicles arebrought to you by Real Good
Ventures, a talent optimizationfirm helping organizations
diagnose their most criticalpeople and execution issues with
world-class analytics.
Make sure to check out all theresources in the show notes and
be sure to follow us and shareyour feedback.
(01:33):
Enjoy today's episode.
Sara Best (01:39):
Welcome back to The Bossh ole Chronicles.
Everybody, it's great to bewith you.
I am your co-host, Sara Best,and we are here today because we
never want to waste a goodopportunity to learn from a bad
boss.
Today, I'm joined, as always,by my ever-fabulous co-host and
brofessor.
John Broer (01:59):
Mr John Broer.
Good morning, John, how are you?
I'm good, sarah, good to seeyou, as always.
How are you?
Sara Best (02:03):
I'm doing great.
I think the topic, the subjectmatter for today is simple yet
powerful.
And with that, John, I'm goingto toss it right over to you to
tell us about our subject fortoday's episode.
John Broer (02:17):
All right, happy to do that, and this is in keeping
with some of our real core toolsand elements that we use when
we're working with clients.
But today we're going to talkabout the head, the heart and
the briefcase.
And the head, heart andbriefcase is the way we look at
people relative to what theybring to an organization, to a
(02:40):
relationship and so forth, andwe have a really cool
illustration of this and, as amatter of fact, we'll put this
in the show notes so you canjust take a look at it.
But whenever we start to thinkabout a person and perhaps their
fit and optimization within anorganization, we encourage our
clients to think about the head,the heart and the briefcase,
(03:01):
and we'll actually start withthe briefcase.
Okay, so with the briefcase,this is our reference, or how we
refer to a person's resume,their credentials, their KSAs,
knowledge, skills, abilities.
These are the things that theyput down in a job application or
they have on their resume tolet us know what they've done in
(03:22):
the past.
Now, the interesting thingabout the briefcase is that it's
typically the primary variablethat organizations consider when
hiring and recruiting andselecting somebody for a
particular position.
Now, the one thing that wealways like to advise our
clients to consider is that,while it does give an indication
(03:44):
of a person's past experienceand may indicate perhaps minimum
qualifications that they haveto have for a position, the
briefcase actually is a reallypoor predictor of future
performance.
And whenever we say that we'llget a lot of, sometimes we'll
get some pushback, sarah.
I mean you know the clientswill say what are you talking
(04:04):
about?
I mean, this tells us whatthey've done in the past and I
said that's true, but there isno correlation to how they will
actually perform in the future.
It just simply lets you knowwhat they've done in the past.
What we advise clients to do isuse that to establish minimum
qualifications, sort of athreshold.
In other words, in order to bein this role in our company, you
(04:36):
have to have these minimumqualifications.
Now, maybe it's a certificationlevel of education, licensure
of some sort, but that's it,because once they hit that level
the way our analytics platformis built then anybody who hits
the minimum qualifications, wewant to administer the
behavioral assessment andperhaps, depending on the
(04:58):
position, also the cognitiveassessment.
But it only tells us what aperson has done in the past and
is not a good predictor offuture performance.
Sara Best (05:08):
I'm going to add to what you're saying, john, about
the briefcase.
You know that it's pastexperience.
Let's be honest If you're ahiring manager, if you've ever
had to be responsible for makingthat decision that someone
should work for your company ornot, you're probably like me,
where you're saying a littleprayer Like man, I hope that
person's experience, which looksreally good like they did all
(05:29):
this stuff.
I hope they can do that here,like that's what we need them to
come and do that here.
We can begin to see how faultythat thinking is, and if you've
ever created your own resume,you can appreciate and
understand that how those skillsand experiences are represented
is a matter of wording.
Basically, there's no way thatwe can translate over to the
(05:52):
current environment things thatare represented on a piece of
paper, even talked about in aninterview.
So I just wanted to highlightthat, john.
John Broer (05:59):
Let's be honest.
Oh, I think that's critical and, yeah, hope is not a strategy
in any realm, by the way.
But you're right and I thinkthat if we are using the resume
as a means of filtering peopleand we are lookingatical errors,
that's going to reflect poorlyon the candidate.
However, to your point, it isliterally a guessing game if
(06:31):
that's the only element orthat's the only variable you're
considering at that point.
So, as we said, there are threeof them.
So that's the briefcase.
Sarah, tell us a little bitabout the heart.
Sara Best (06:42):
Well, in the heart, John, are the things that we are
passionate about, the thingsthat we value, our beliefs.
I'd also say that it's, youknow, kind of like our emotional
intelligence.
It's the things that we arewilling to adapt.
But in the heart, you know,things like values, passions,
interests, much like thebriefcase, John.
(07:04):
These things will changethroughout our lifetime.
You know, as we mature, as weexperience a lot of different
things.
Gosh, I mean the last year and ahalf to 18 months, how many
people's perspectives and eventheir philosophies have changed
as a result of a pandemic.
So we would appreciate that thevalues and the interests have
(07:26):
to be considered when selectingsomebody.
They may or may not be alignedwith the organizational values,
but more than anything, they'revery personal and they need to
be acknowledged because they'repart of that whole person.
We would suggest, too, that theheart and the briefcase, those
things are not static.
They do change.
(07:46):
You know, we put new tools inour briefcase, we take some
tools out.
I just think about my career.
Some of the certifications andthe work that I did early in my
career have lapsed and expiredand I won't ever use those again
, but they were part of thebriefcase back at a time, and
now I have different credentialsand different focus, so
appreciating that those arerepresentative of the chapters
(08:08):
that we're in in our career andin our life.
John Broer (08:10):
Somebody asked me the you know when I've made this
or shared this explanation withthem.
They said, well, I don't thinkmy core values have changed you
know that much in my lifetime.
And I said, okay, I willacknowledge that.
But they've evolved.
You know so at my age now, withadult sons and I mean you have
adult children as well theperspective and your view on
(08:32):
life evolves over time.
It does, and we still have ourcore values.
However, they're just notstable and therefore are not a
good representative predictor offuture performance for sure.
Now they're critical.
They're part of the wholeperson.
And the other thing that Ithink is really interesting
about the heart is that peoplewill say well, how on earth do
(08:54):
you even understand that about aperson?
Well, organizations that havegood behavioral-based interview
processes in other words, theytrain their hiring managers and
the people that are doing therecruiting and the interviewing
and help them understand what isbehavioral-based interviewing
and what is behavioral-basedinterviewing really can reveal
an element of a person's heartand where they are on their core
(09:16):
values and interests andgifting and passions.
So don't let that slip away.
That's a critical part of it,but, like you said, it changes
over time.
Sara Best (09:25):
It does so, john, the part that doesn't really change
a whole lot for our lifetime iswhat's comprised in the head.
Why don't you unpack that forus?
John Broer (09:34):
Okay, in the head.
This is where our work actuallyresides.
Within the PI platform, we havea couple of our core
assessments the behavioralassessment and the cognitive
assessment and it measuresspecifically what's in a
person's head, their naturalbehavioral drives and factor
combinations which they've hadsince they were eight to 10
years old, as well as a person'sgeneral cognitive ability, and
(09:57):
we'll talk about thoseseparately.
Let's start with a person'snatural drives.
So your natural behavioraldrives have been in place since
you were eight to 10 years old,and because we can measure them
and realize that our analyticsand our science, our highly
validated science, goes all theway back to the 1950s Actually
it is before the 1950s in thework that Arnold Daniels was
(10:19):
doing in the 1940s.
However, because yourbehavioral drives are
established at such a young age,they are a great predictor of
who you are now and therefore,because we can measure it, it
helps us to prescribeoptimization of a role that you
can have within an organization.
So a person's naturalbehavioral drives shows up and
(10:41):
you've heard this in the podcastas one of 17 reference profiles
, and then we can dig evendeeper into that and understand
the unique nature of a person'sbehavioral tendencies and their
behavioral DNA.
So the other side of that isgeneral cognitive ability and
that's the cognitive assessmentin our platform.
So a simple way ofunderstanding general cognitive
(11:03):
ability.
It is related to IQ, but it'snot the same thing.
What it is is it's the abilityto measure a person's capacity
to deal with complexity.
That's what general cognitiveability is and, by the way, it
is regarded as the bestpredictor of future performance
far and away.
(11:23):
So when you combine thealignment of a person's general
cognitive ability with acognitive match for a particular
job or role and theirbehavioral DNA, you get those
two things together.
It is an incredibly powerfulpredictor of future performance.
Now, we always advise ourclients.
(11:46):
You know our analytics are justone part of a larger recruiting
and selection and successionplanning sort of process.
You never just want to use onedata point as the determinant
for whether you're going to hiresomebody or let somebody go.
You never want to do that.
But this data is so relevantand so powerful.
(12:07):
It is, at the, at its very core, the tool that we use to help
optimize fit within anorganization and then help
people grow and evolve and, youknow, just become better
versions of who they are.
Sara Best (12:24):
Well, and to that point, John, you know we're
talking about recruitment andselection of employees, and
Predictive Index is, in fact,one of the few validated tools
that is compliant with the lawand able to be used as a
recruitment and selection tool.
Part of that is because it's afree choice assessment.
It is designed to remove bias,that you know.
(12:50):
So compliance withanti-discrimination laws, the
repeated validity of theassessment, you know all comes
into play.
I think what I love most aboutthis idea of the head, the heart
and the briefcase is, you know,yes, we want to consider their
past experiences, we want toconsider what they value, what
individuals believe in, whatthey're passionate about.
(13:11):
Those things are reallyrelevant and important.
But more than that, it's thisidea of how is this person going
to do the work, how are theynaturally wired to do the work?
Does it fit with what we expectof this role?
And unmet expectations, I think, are the bane of manager's
existence, if you will.
The problem is we don'testablish those expectations up
(13:34):
front.
Therefore, we don't exactlyknow what to measure against.
But the head, the heart and thebriefcase create such a great
frame to do that better, to doit less subjectively and to do
it in honor of and with respectto setting a person up for
success.
Because, john, you know what isoften said and you're going to
(13:56):
unveil that little couple ofstatements we always say around
the head, the heart and thebriefcase.
John Broer (14:00):
Absolutely, absolutely, and this is so true.
People are hired for what theyknow and they're fired for who
they are.
Sara Best (14:07):
Yes.
John Broer (14:08):
And I would even say it is true.
Sara Best (14:10):
I always go a step further to say you may not have
been fired.
I was never fired from a job,but I definitely found myself
ill fit for the expectationsthat a manager had of me and
able to move on from thatparticular function because
there was quite a bit ofsuffering and agony around
misaligned expectations and whatwas perceived as poor
(14:32):
performance.
John Broer (14:33):
Oh, absolutely yeah.
So go ahead and substitutefired for ill fit, disengaged,
unhappy, unmotivatedmisalignment or sub-optimization
when we do not apply theframework of talent optimization
, which is another episode.
So if you're listening to this,go back, and if you haven't
listened to the talentoptimization episode, make sure
(14:55):
you do.
But that is that's what this isall about, and you know what.
There's some interesting trapsthat our clients have gotten
into that we've helped tocorrect.
Sarah, and your comments makeme think about this.
For example, we've had a coupleof clients that have said well,
in terms of general cognitiveability, this person is.
(15:16):
Well, they're an attorney orthey have an MBA.
That has no bearing on generalcognitive ability.
That's a briefcase thing.
So, just because somebody andthis isn't, I'm not discrediting
anybody that has an advanceddegree of any kind, but it
doesn't reflect generalcognitive ability.
General cognitive ability is aperson's capacity to deal with
(15:38):
complexity.
So you could have a PhD andstill have a moderate amount of
capacity to deal with complexity.
Critical that people mistakewhat really is more of a
(15:58):
briefcase characteristic andmisplace it and say, oh, they've
got to be incredibly smart.
Well, I'm not saying they'renot smart.
Smart and cognitive ability aretwo different things.
Sara Best (16:05):
Well, smart does not equal accomplished either.
Exactly, I think, what you'resaying.
The other important point tonote about the cognitive
assessment is, with many of theclients that we work with
there's a hesitation to use thecognitive assessment, and it's
understandable.
They don't want the informationto be misused.
I would suggest that cognitiveability tests, you know to be in
(16:29):
compliance with the Americanswith Disabilities Act and all
the things that govern how weselect candidates.
You know there has to beappropriate accommodation and it
has to be validated to thepoint where it is not diagnostic
.
The cognitive assessment, youknow it's important to at least
(16:49):
understand and set a target forthe complexity of any particular
role.
So that's another place where Ithink organizations could spend
a little more time thinkingabout.
You know how fast-paced is thework, how complex, how much
change is going to be relativeto this position or frequent in
this position, and you know ifwe're picking a candidate who
(17:11):
has a high degree of stabilityand a need for consistency, but
we're putting them in anenvironment that's very what's
the word?
John, john.
John Broer (17:19):
Chaotic.
Sara Best (17:19):
Maryam Very chaotic and fast-paced and lots of
things happening at once.
John Broer (17:24):
John Right.
Sara Best (17:24):
Maryam so that cognitive expectation being set
in advance really does thenfurther the clarity in the
selection process and give thatcandidate a better opportunity,
you know, for success.
John Broer (17:37):
We actually had a couple of examples One that I'm
thinking of right now, where wehad a group of regional managers
and actually their behavioralalignment to the target was
great, absolutely great, andthese, these were a dozen really
solid performers in theorganization.
And then the organization wasmagnified.
(17:57):
The complexity of the positionitself, I mean.
They literally changed the roleto where it was far more
complex and almost immediatelythey saw a third of those folks.
They excelled, they had noproblem dealing with it.
They had about another thirdthat were just keeping pace with
what's necessary.
And then there was another thirdthat was struggling.
(18:18):
I mean, they were falling farbehind and they asked me they
said, well, maybe we just needto get rid of them.
I said whoa, whoa, whoa, holdon a second, you're the ones
that made the change.
You changed the complexity ofthe role and actually we had
some people falling behind.
Well, what does that tell us?
That means that perhaps weprovide additional support, or
(18:46):
maybe there was additionaltraining or time that is
necessary to get them up tocompetence or a level of
competency to be able to do thejob.
However, there's always goingto be.
If you continue to acceleratecomplexity, you're always going
to have that gap and that justis information that helps us
manage and optimize our peoplemore effectively.
Sara Best (19:07):
So no, I think that's all really Sure and I know in
our work recently we have hadsome success in building a
succession plan inside a prettyfast-paced organization, but the
(19:33):
plan encompasses the datamatching and aligning internal
candidates with, you know,respective leadership roles and
high-level leadership roles atthat, and actually having some
runway.
The one thing I appreciate mostabout how this organization is
approaching succession isthey're starting a few years
(19:54):
back.
They're anticipating the changethat's coming, especially on
their executive leadership team,and are deploying, you know,
the behavioral and the cognitiveassessment to help better
assess and develop thecandidates who are most
appropriate for those leadershiproles.
I wanted to share, too, a greatexample.
We're doing a leadershipacademy.
(20:14):
It's funded by a grant and it'sa collection of nominated and
sort of hand-selected emergingleaders that work in a specific
industry with a specific focus,and the head, the heart and the
briefcase has been the frameworkfor which each candidate in
this leadership program has beenasked to design a project.
(20:51):
So there's a lot of latitudethey're given, given head, heart
, briefcase In the head kind ofprojects, we're seeing people
really find ways to get learning, to adjust their pace of work
appropriately, learning torespect and appreciate the team
they have to lead and then alsoadjusting their expectations of
(21:12):
those people, kind of gettingoutside of their own drives and
better adapting or kind ofadopting this notion of how can
I optimize my direct reports.
That's an example of of a headproject.
In the heart, you know, we'vegot people who are really
working hard to use the skillsof emotional intelligence.
They're building self-regard.
For example, in this particulargroup there's a number of
(21:34):
people that have very lowself-regard.
They have high degrees ofempathy, so they're very tuned
in to the work they're doing andthe clients they serve.
Yet on the inside there's not alot of gas in the tank around
appreciating self and strengths.
So we always talk about how youcan't give away what you don't
have, and so adjusting andbuilding that sense of self so
(21:56):
that it's equivalent to theempathy makes them a much more
impactful practitioner.
That's a heart project.
And then the briefcase holy cow.
They're being so creative, themembers of this cohort to design
ways to achieve additionalcertification, even ways to take
the learning that PI and EIhave given them, so that they
(22:19):
can build a project or build aprocess or initiative inside
their organization.
So I thought that was aninteresting framework and I
think it's applicable, you know,to a lot of different things
that we're doing inside ourorganizations.
John Broer (22:33):
No question, and I think you have just let our
listeners know that the thingyou really need to take away
from this episode is that thewhole person shows up.
That's right you know you can'tseparate, you know, head, heart
and briefcase from the others.
It's the whole person andthat's why, when we are
considering whether it'ssomebody from outside the
(22:54):
organization bringing them in or, to your point, the people that
are already here, how do wehelp them grow, how do we
optimize them?
We have to think about the head, the heart and the briefcase,
because they all go together.
Great example, sarah.
That's awesome.
Sara Best (23:07):
Yep and John, great topic today.
Thank you for your time andthanks to our listeners.
Don't forget to check the shownotes If you want an opportunity
to take the PI and get yourreference profile so you can
begin really digging into thismore fully for yourself.
The head, the heart and thebriefcase, john.
What do our listeners need todo?
John Broer (23:26):
Just go into the show notes.
You'll see a link to get yourreference profile.
Just go ahead and do that.
We turn those around prettyquickly.
By the way, if anybody has anyquestions about it, you can
always reach out to us at infoat realgoodventurescom.
Sara Best (23:42):
Thanks, take care, bye-bye.
John Broer (23:51):
Thanks very much for checking out this episode of
the Boss Hole Chronicles.
It was so good to have you here, and if you have your own boss
hole story that you want toshare with the Boss Hole
Transformation Nation, justreach out.
You can email us at my story atthe boss hole chronicles dot
com.
Again, my story at the bosshole chronicles dot com.
We'll see you next time.
All right, folks, we're introducing a new type of
episode for The Bossh oleChronicles.
We're calling it a TBC thatstands for The Bossh ole
Chronicles, a TBC flashback ofan episode we dropped a couple
of years ago about head, heartand briefcase.
Head, heart and briefcase isour terminology for what we call
(00:30):
the whole person model.
Managers, supervisors, cannotlook at one single aspect of an
individual.
A lot of times it's just theperformance, or it's a person's
resume, or, as we call it, thebriefcase.
No, you have to look at thewhole person head, heart and
briefcase and the behavioral andcognitive data that we get from
(00:50):
our platform that lives in thehead, but that only tells part
of the story.
So if you are looking to stayout of the boss hole zone and
understand the best way todevelop, guide and grow your
direct reports, you've got tounderstand the whole person
model.
And so here's a littleflashback of an episode we
dropped a few years ago aboutHead, heart and Briefcase.
(01:12):
The Bossh ole Chronicles arebrought to you by Real Good
Ventures, a talent optimizationfirm helping organizations
diagnose their most criticalpeople and execution issues with
world-class analytics.
Make sure to check out all theresources in the show notes and
be sure to follow us and shareyour feedback.
(01:33):
Enjoy today's episode.
Sara Best (01:39):
Welcome back to The Bossh ole Chronicles.
Everybody, it's great to bewith you.
I am your co-host, Sara Best,and we are here today because we
never want to waste a goodopportunity to learn from a bad
boss.
Today, I'm joined, as always,by my ever-fabulous co-host and
brofessor.
John Broer (01:59):
Mr John Broer.
Good morning, John, how are you?
I'm good, sarah, good to seeyou, as always.
How are you?
Sara Best (02:03):
I'm doing great.
I think the topic, the subjectmatter for today is simple yet
powerful.
And with that, John, I'm goingto toss it right over to you to
tell us about our subject fortoday's episode.
John Broer (02:17):
All right, happy to do that, and this is in keeping
with some of our real core toolsand elements that we use when
we're working with clients.
But today we're going to talkabout the head, the heart and
the briefcase.
And the head, heart andbriefcase is the way we look at
people relative to what theybring to an organization, to a
(02:40):
relationship and so forth, andwe have a really cool
illustration of this and, as amatter of fact, we'll put this
in the show notes so you canjust take a look at it.
But whenever we start to thinkabout a person and perhaps their
fit and optimization within anorganization, we encourage our
clients to think about the head,the heart and the briefcase,
(03:01):
and we'll actually start withthe briefcase.
Okay, so with the briefcase,this is our reference, or how we
refer to a person's resume,their credentials, their KSAs,
knowledge, skills, abilities.
These are the things that theyput down in a job application or
they have on their resume tolet us know what they've done in
(03:22):
the past.
Now, the interesting thingabout the briefcase is that it's
typically the primary variablethat organizations consider when
hiring and recruiting andselecting somebody for a
particular position.
Now, the one thing that wealways like to advise our
clients to consider is that,while it does give an indication
(03:44):
of a person's past experienceand may indicate perhaps minimum
qualifications that they haveto have for a position, the
briefcase actually is a reallypoor predictor of future
performance.
And whenever we say that we'llget a lot of, sometimes we'll
get some pushback, sarah.
I mean you know the clientswill say what are you talking
(04:04):
about?
I mean, this tells us whatthey've done in the past and I
said that's true, but there isno correlation to how they will
actually perform in the future.
It just simply lets you knowwhat they've done in the past.
What we advise clients to do isuse that to establish minimum
qualifications, sort of athreshold.
In other words, in order to bein this role in our company, you
(04:36):
have to have these minimumqualifications.
Now, maybe it's a certificationlevel of education, licensure
of some sort, but that's it,because once they hit that level
the way our analytics platformis built then anybody who hits
the minimum qualifications, wewant to administer the
behavioral assessment andperhaps, depending on the
(04:58):
position, also the cognitiveassessment.
But it only tells us what aperson has done in the past and
is not a good predictor offuture performance.
Sara Best (05:08):
I'm going to add to what you're saying, john, about
the briefcase.
You know that it's pastexperience.
Let's be honest If you're ahiring manager, if you've ever
had to be responsible for makingthat decision that someone
should work for your company ornot, you're probably like me,
where you're saying a littleprayer Like man, I hope that
person's experience, which looksreally good like they did all
(05:29):
this stuff.
I hope they can do that here,like that's what we need them to
come and do that here.
We can begin to see how faultythat thinking is, and if you've
ever created your own resume,you can appreciate and
understand that how those skillsand experiences are represented
is a matter of wording.
Basically, there's no way thatwe can translate over to the
(05:52):
current environment things thatare represented on a piece of
paper, even talked about in aninterview.
So I just wanted to highlightthat, john.
John Broer (05:59):
Let's be honest.
Oh, I think that's critical and, yeah, hope is not a strategy
in any realm, by the way.
But you're right and I thinkthat if we are using the resume
as a means of filtering peopleand we are lookingatical errors,
that's going to reflect poorlyon the candidate.
However, to your point, it isliterally a guessing game if
(06:31):
that's the only element orthat's the only variable you're
considering at that point.
So, as we said, there are threeof them.
So that's the briefcase.
Sarah, tell us a little bitabout the heart.
Sara Best (06:42):
Well, in the heart, John, are the things that we are
passionate about, the thingsthat we value, our beliefs.
I'd also say that it's, youknow, kind of like our emotional
intelligence.
It's the things that we arewilling to adapt.
But in the heart, you know,things like values, passions,
interests, much like thebriefcase, John.
(07:04):
These things will changethroughout our lifetime.
You know, as we mature, as weexperience a lot of different
things.
Gosh, I mean the last year and ahalf to 18 months, how many
people's perspectives and eventheir philosophies have changed
as a result of a pandemic.
So we would appreciate that thevalues and the interests have
(07:26):
to be considered when selectingsomebody.
They may or may not be alignedwith the organizational values,
but more than anything, they'revery personal and they need to
be acknowledged because they'repart of that whole person.
We would suggest, too, that theheart and the briefcase, those
things are not static.
They do change.
(07:46):
You know, we put new tools inour briefcase, we take some
tools out.
I just think about my career.
Some of the certifications andthe work that I did early in my
career have lapsed and expiredand I won't ever use those again
, but they were part of thebriefcase back at a time, and
now I have different credentialsand different focus, so
appreciating that those arerepresentative of the chapters
(08:08):
that we're in in our career andin our life.
John Broer (08:10):
Somebody asked me the you know when I've made this
or shared this explanation withthem.
They said, well, I don't thinkmy core values have changed you
know that much in my lifetime.
And I said, okay, I willacknowledge that.
But they've evolved.
You know so at my age now, withadult sons and I mean you have
adult children as well theperspective and your view on
(08:32):
life evolves over time.
It does, and we still have ourcore values.
However, they're just notstable and therefore are not a
good representative predictor offuture performance for sure.
Now they're critical.
They're part of the wholeperson.
And the other thing that Ithink is really interesting
about the heart is that peoplewill say well, how on earth do
(08:54):
you even understand that about aperson?
Well, organizations that havegood behavioral-based interview
processes in other words, theytrain their hiring managers and
the people that are doing therecruiting and the interviewing
and help them understand what isbehavioral-based interviewing
and what is behavioral-basedinterviewing really can reveal
an element of a person's heartand where they are on their core
(09:16):
values and interests andgifting and passions.
So don't let that slip away.
That's a critical part of it,but, like you said, it changes
over time.
Sara Best (09:25):
It does so, john, the part that doesn't really change
a whole lot for our lifetime iswhat's comprised in the head.
Why don't you unpack that forus?
John Broer (09:34):
Okay, in the head.
This is where our work actuallyresides.
Within the PI platform, we havea couple of our core
assessments the behavioralassessment and the cognitive
assessment and it measuresspecifically what's in a
person's head, their naturalbehavioral drives and factor
combinations which they've hadsince they were eight to 10
years old, as well as a person'sgeneral cognitive ability, and
(09:57):
we'll talk about thoseseparately.
Let's start with a person'snatural drives.
So your natural behavioraldrives have been in place since
you were eight to 10 years old,and because we can measure them
and realize that our analyticsand our science, our highly
validated science, goes all theway back to the 1950s Actually
it is before the 1950s in thework that Arnold Daniels was
(10:19):
doing in the 1940s.
However, because yourbehavioral drives are
established at such a young age,they are a great predictor of
who you are now and therefore,because we can measure it, it
helps us to prescribeoptimization of a role that you
can have within an organization.
So a person's naturalbehavioral drives shows up and
(10:41):
you've heard this in the podcastas one of 17 reference profiles
, and then we can dig evendeeper into that and understand
the unique nature of a person'sbehavioral tendencies and their
behavioral DNA.
So the other side of that isgeneral cognitive ability and
that's the cognitive assessmentin our platform.
So a simple way ofunderstanding general cognitive
(11:03):
ability.
It is related to IQ, but it'snot the same thing.
What it is is it's the abilityto measure a person's capacity
to deal with complexity.
That's what general cognitiveability is and, by the way, it
is regarded as the bestpredictor of future performance
far and away.
(11:23):
So when you combine thealignment of a person's general
cognitive ability with acognitive match for a particular
job or role and theirbehavioral DNA, you get those
two things together.
It is an incredibly powerfulpredictor of future performance.
Now, we always advise ourclients.
(11:46):
You know our analytics are justone part of a larger recruiting
and selection and successionplanning sort of process.
You never just want to use onedata point as the determinant
for whether you're going to hiresomebody or let somebody go.
You never want to do that.
But this data is so relevantand so powerful.
(12:07):
It is, at the, at its very core, the tool that we use to help
optimize fit within anorganization and then help
people grow and evolve and, youknow, just become better
versions of who they are.
Sara Best (12:24):
Well, and to that point, John, you know we're
talking about recruitment andselection of employees, and
Predictive Index is, in fact,one of the few validated tools
that is compliant with the lawand able to be used as a
recruitment and selection tool.
Part of that is because it's afree choice assessment.
It is designed to remove bias,that you know.
(12:50):
So compliance withanti-discrimination laws, the
repeated validity of theassessment, you know all comes
into play.
I think what I love most aboutthis idea of the head, the heart
and the briefcase is, you know,yes, we want to consider their
past experiences, we want toconsider what they value, what
individuals believe in, whatthey're passionate about.
(13:11):
Those things are reallyrelevant and important.
But more than that, it's thisidea of how is this person going
to do the work, how are theynaturally wired to do the work?
Does it fit with what we expectof this role?
And unmet expectations, I think, are the bane of manager's
existence, if you will.
The problem is we don'testablish those expectations up
(13:34):
front.
Therefore, we don't exactlyknow what to measure against.
But the head, the heart and thebriefcase create such a great
frame to do that better, to doit less subjectively and to do
it in honor of and with respectto setting a person up for
success.
Because, john, you know what isoften said and you're going to
(13:56):
unveil that little couple ofstatements we always say around
the head, the heart and thebriefcase.
John Broer (14:00):
Absolutely, absolutely, and this is so true.
People are hired for what theyknow and they're fired for who
they are.
Sara Best (14:07):
Yes.
John Broer (14:08):
And I would even say it is true.
Sara Best (14:10):
I always go a step further to say you may not have
been fired.
I was never fired from a job,but I definitely found myself
ill fit for the expectationsthat a manager had of me and
able to move on from thatparticular function because
there was quite a bit ofsuffering and agony around
misaligned expectations and whatwas perceived as poor
(14:32):
performance.
John Broer (14:33):
Oh, absolutely yeah.
So go ahead and substitutefired for ill fit, disengaged,
unhappy, unmotivatedmisalignment or sub-optimization
when we do not apply theframework of talent optimization
, which is another episode.
So if you're listening to this,go back, and if you haven't
listened to the talentoptimization episode, make sure
(14:55):
you do.
But that is that's what this isall about, and you know what.
There's some interesting trapsthat our clients have gotten
into that we've helped tocorrect.
Sarah, and your comments makeme think about this.
For example, we've had a coupleof clients that have said well,
in terms of general cognitiveability, this person is.
(15:16):
Well, they're an attorney orthey have an MBA.
That has no bearing on generalcognitive ability.
That's a briefcase thing.
So, just because somebody andthis isn't, I'm not discrediting
anybody that has an advanceddegree of any kind, but it
doesn't reflect generalcognitive ability.
General cognitive ability is aperson's capacity to deal with
(15:38):
complexity.
So you could have a PhD andstill have a moderate amount of
capacity to deal with complexity.
Critical that people mistakewhat really is more of a
(15:58):
briefcase characteristic andmisplace it and say, oh, they've
got to be incredibly smart.
Well, I'm not saying they'renot smart.
Smart and cognitive ability aretwo different things.
Sara Best (16:05):
Well, smart does not equal accomplished either.
Exactly, I think, what you'resaying.
The other important point tonote about the cognitive
assessment is, with many of theclients that we work with
there's a hesitation to use thecognitive assessment, and it's
understandable.
They don't want the informationto be misused.
I would suggest that cognitiveability tests, you know to be in
(16:29):
compliance with the Americanswith Disabilities Act and all
the things that govern how weselect candidates.
You know there has to beappropriate accommodation and it
has to be validated to thepoint where it is not diagnostic
.
The cognitive assessment, youknow it's important to at least
(16:49):
understand and set a target forthe complexity of any particular
role.
So that's another place where Ithink organizations could spend
a little more time thinkingabout.
You know how fast-paced is thework, how complex, how much
change is going to be relativeto this position or frequent in
this position, and you know ifwe're picking a candidate who
(17:11):
has a high degree of stabilityand a need for consistency, but
we're putting them in anenvironment that's very what's
the word?
John, john.
John Broer (17:19):
Chaotic.
Sara Best (17:19):
Maryam Very chaotic and fast-paced and lots of
things happening at once.
John Broer (17:24):
John Right.
Sara Best (17:24):
Maryam so that cognitive expectation being set
in advance really does thenfurther the clarity in the
selection process and give thatcandidate a better opportunity,
you know, for success.
John Broer (17:37):
We actually had a couple of examples One that I'm
thinking of right now, where wehad a group of regional managers
and actually their behavioralalignment to the target was
great, absolutely great, andthese, these were a dozen really
solid performers in theorganization.
And then the organization wasmagnified.
(17:57):
The complexity of the positionitself, I mean.
They literally changed the roleto where it was far more
complex and almost immediatelythey saw a third of those folks.
They excelled, they had noproblem dealing with it.
They had about another thirdthat were just keeping pace with
what's necessary.
And then there was another thirdthat was struggling.
(18:18):
I mean, they were falling farbehind and they asked me they
said, well, maybe we just needto get rid of them.
I said whoa, whoa, whoa, holdon a second, you're the ones
that made the change.
You changed the complexity ofthe role and actually we had
some people falling behind.
Well, what does that tell us?
That means that perhaps weprovide additional support, or
(18:46):
maybe there was additionaltraining or time that is
necessary to get them up tocompetence or a level of
competency to be able to do thejob.
However, there's always goingto be.
If you continue to acceleratecomplexity, you're always going
to have that gap and that justis information that helps us
manage and optimize our peoplemore effectively.
Sara Best (19:07):
So no, I think that's all really Sure and I know in
our work recently we have hadsome success in building a
succession plan inside a prettyfast-paced organization, but the
(19:33):
plan encompasses the datamatching and aligning internal
candidates with, you know,respective leadership roles and
high-level leadership roles atthat, and actually having some
runway.
The one thing I appreciate mostabout how this organization is
approaching succession isthey're starting a few years
(19:54):
back.
They're anticipating the changethat's coming, especially on
their executive leadership team,and are deploying, you know,
the behavioral and the cognitiveassessment to help better
assess and develop thecandidates who are most
appropriate for those leadershiproles.
I wanted to share, too, a greatexample.
We're doing a leadershipacademy.
(20:14):
It's funded by a grant and it'sa collection of nominated and
sort of hand-selected emergingleaders that work in a specific
industry with a specific focus,and the head, the heart and the
briefcase has been the frameworkfor which each candidate in
this leadership program has beenasked to design a project.
(20:51):
So there's a lot of latitudethey're given, given head, heart
, briefcase In the head kind ofprojects, we're seeing people
really find ways to get learning, to adjust their pace of work
appropriately, learning torespect and appreciate the team
they have to lead and then alsoadjusting their expectations of
(21:12):
those people, kind of gettingoutside of their own drives and
better adapting or kind ofadopting this notion of how can
I optimize my direct reports.
That's an example of of a headproject.
In the heart, you know, we'vegot people who are really
working hard to use the skillsof emotional intelligence.
They're building self-regard.
For example, in this particulargroup there's a number of
(21:34):
people that have very lowself-regard.
They have high degrees ofempathy, so they're very tuned
in to the work they're doing andthe clients they serve.
Yet on the inside there's not alot of gas in the tank around
appreciating self and strengths.
So we always talk about how youcan't give away what you don't
have, and so adjusting andbuilding that sense of self so
(21:56):
that it's equivalent to theempathy makes them a much more
impactful practitioner.
That's a heart project.
And then the briefcase holy cow.
They're being so creative, themembers of this cohort to design
ways to achieve additionalcertification, even ways to take
the learning that PI and EIhave given them, so that they
(22:19):
can build a project or build aprocess or initiative inside
their organization.
So I thought that was aninteresting framework and I
think it's applicable, you know,to a lot of different things
that we're doing inside ourorganizations.
John Broer (22:33):
No question, and I think you have just let our
listeners know that the thingyou really need to take away
from this episode is that thewhole person shows up.
That's right you know you can'tseparate, you know, head, heart
and briefcase from the others.
It's the whole person andthat's why, when we are
considering whether it'ssomebody from outside the
(22:54):
organization bringing them in or, to your point, the people that
are already here, how do wehelp them grow, how do we
optimize them?
We have to think about the head, the heart and the briefcase,
because they all go together.
Great example, sarah.
That's awesome.
Sara Best (23:07):
Yep and John, great topic today.
Thank you for your time andthanks to our listeners.
Don't forget to check the shownotes If you want an opportunity
to take the PI and get yourreference profile so you can
begin really digging into thismore fully for yourself.
The head, the heart and thebriefcase, john.
What do our listeners need todo?
John Broer (23:26):
Just go into the show notes.
You'll see a link to get yourreference profile.
Just go ahead and do that.
We turn those around prettyquickly.
By the way, if anybody has anyquestions about it, you can
always reach out to us at infoat realgoodventurescom.
Sara Best (23:42):
Thanks, take care, bye-bye.
John Broer (23:51):
Thanks very much for checking out this episode of
the Boss Hole Chronicles.
It was so good to have you here, and if you have your own boss
hole story that you want toshare with the Boss Hole
Transformation Nation, justreach out.
You can email us at my story atthe boss hole chronicles dot
com.
Again, my story at the bosshole chronicles dot com.
We'll see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.