Leadership Potential Indicator User Manual

Leadership Potential Indicator User Manual
Leadership Potential
Indicator
> User Manual
Copyright © 2011-14, MySkillsProfile.com Limited.
www.myskillsprofile.com
LPI is a trademark of MySkillsProfile.com Limited.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any
form or by any means or stored in a database or retrieval system without the prior written
permission of MySkillsProfile.com Limited.
LPI User Manual 1
Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Purpose of LPI ............................................................................................................. 3
1.2 LPI Competency Models .............................................................................................. 3
1.3 LPI Development ......................................................................................................... 4
2. Administration ................................................................................................................. 11
2.1 Applications ............................................................................................................... 11
2.2 Test Administration .................................................................................................... 11
2.3 Norming ..................................................................................................................... 12
3. Scale Descriptions .......................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Overview ................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Sten Scale ................................................................................................................. 13
3.3 How to Interpret Scores ............................................................................................. 14
4. Norms ............................................................................................................................. 35
4.1 International Comparison Group ................................................................................ 35
4.2 Norms Table .............................................................................................................. 37
5. Reliability and Validity ..................................................................................................... 39
5.1 Reliability ................................................................................................................... 39
5.2 Standard Error of Measurement ................................................................................ 40
5.3 Validity ....................................................................................................................... 40
6. Group Comparisons ........................................................................................................ 50
6.1 Gender ...................................................................................................................... 50
6.2 Age ............................................................................................................................ 51
6.3 Ethnic Origin .............................................................................................................. 51
6.4 Nationality.................................................................................................................. 52
References ......................................................................................................................... 55
LPI User Manual 2
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose of LPI
The Leadership Potential Indicator (LPI) is designed to help individuals in management and
leadership positions identify their current areas of competency and decide where they should
focus their development efforts. This manual describes the LPI competency approach and
the design and development of the instrument.
1.2 LPI Competency Models
The LPI questionnaire was designed around a five-factor concept model of management and
leadership: Managing Change, Planning and Organizing, Interpersonal Skills, Results
Orientation, and Leadership. Statistical analysis of the questionnaire indicates that three
leadership meta-competencies underpin the personal competencies assessed by the
measure (Figure 1).
Figure 1. LPI Models of Management and Leadership Competencies
Concept Model
Factor Model
Managing
Change
Strategic
management
Planning and
Organizing
People
management
Interpersonal
Skills
Business
management
Results
Orientation
Leadership
LPI User Manual 3
1.3 LPI Development
The development and production of the LPI can be broken down into three broad work
streams.
Phase 1. In the first phase of development, we carried out a literature review and content
analysis of models and measures of management and leadership competencies, and
developed a five-branch model of management and leadership competencies. We then
developed, piloted, and published a 20-scale instrument based on this five-branch model.
The first commercial version of the assessment was published as a paper and pencil test in
1998.
Phase 2. In 2004, we carried out an evaluation of the instrument which led to the publication
of the second version of the instrument with a revised user manual and a new computergenerated feedback report. We made changes to some of the scales to improve their
reliability, and we published new norms based on a much larger international comparison
group. The revised user manual provided a more detailed picture of the psychometric
properties of the instrument.
Phase 3. In 2014, we carried out a second evaluation of the LPI in preparation for submitting
the test for review. The objective was to ensure that the measure was ready, and the test
documentation was in a suitable format for, review by the British Psychological Society and
Buros Center for Testing. We did further research on the construct validity of the measure
during this phase, and updated the user manual.
Design standards. The LPI leadership assessment test is designed to meet the key criteria
in the EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological Tests
(Bartram, 2002). The EFPA Review Model was produced to support and encourage the
process of harmonizing the reviewing of tests. It provides a standard set of criteria to assess
the quality of modern psychometric tests. These cover the common areas of test review
such as norms, reliability, and validity.
Competencies. McClelland (1973) is generally credited with using the term "competencies"
to refer to factors that could predict job success. He defined competency as an underlying
characteristic--an ability to do something--producing effective or superior performance. The
LPI competency framework was based on a concept model of management and leadership
competencies modelled on Boyatzis’ (1982) approach illustrated below. A wide-ranging
literature search was carried out to identify competency dimensions related to successful
management performance.
Dimension
Example
Cluster
Leadership
Competency
Use of oral presentations
Skills
Verbal presentation skills
Competency dimensions identified during the literature search were printed on cards. The
resulting cards were sorted into groups, and each group was given a broad title--for
example, "quality/detail orientation". The list of competency groups that emerged from this
process was compared with a list of frequently occurring competencies reported in a survey
of frequently occurring competencies in company competency frameworks and twenty
competencies were selected and grouped under five headings (Table 1).
LPI User Manual 4
Table1. LPI Management and Leadership Competencies
Scale Definition
Initiating activity
Shows initiative, has positive attitude, self-starter
Taking risks
Creating and innovating
Adapting to change
Analyzing and interpreting
Planning and prioritizing
Plans and prioritizes tasks, project manages work effectively
Monitoring quality
Takes pride in work, does job well, gets the detail correct
Listening and supporting
Communicates views and ideas assertively, makes impact with
presentations
Displays sensitivity to people’s needs, involves people in plans and
decisions
Develops strong working relationships, builds rapport quickly
Team working
Strong team player, works effectively with people
Achieving goals
Self-motivated, driven to get ahead, prepared to do whatever it
takes
Meeting customer needs
Applies customer concepts, focuses on quality and service
Focusing on the business
Learning and developing
Persuading and influencing
Coaching others
Coping with pressure
Leadership
Motivating and empowering
Understands the business, focuses on bottom line, keeps eye on
competitors
Exploits opportunities for self-development, demonstrates selfawareness
Has presence and authority, enjoys being in charge, takes lead
when required
Empowers and motivates team members, delegates tasks
effectively
Coaches and mentors team members, gives regular development
feedback
Results Orientation
Relating and networking
Interpersonal Skills
Communicating
Planning and
Organizing
Making decisions
Takes risks, challenges accepted practice, bends rules to make
progress
Originates change, makes things better, produces creative ideas
and solutions
Adapts quickly to change, responds flexibly to people and
situations
Analyses situations carefully, makes rational judgments and logical
decisions
Decides quickly, displays confidence, acts independently when
necessary
Managing Change
Scale
Handles pressure and stress, stays calm and in control
Table 2 shows some of the frequently occurring competencies in company competency
frameworks identified by the 1996 survey (HR-BC/IRS, 1996) which the LPI measures.
LPI User Manual 5
Table 2. Top 10 Competencies in Organization Frameworks
Competency
Frequency
Communication
30
Results-orientation
28
Customer focus
22
Teamwork
22
Leadership
17
Planning and organizing
17
Commercial awareness
16
Developing others
15
Analytical thinking
12
Building relationships
12
In 2004, we revisited the competency literature to check the coverage of the measure with
more recent competency frameworks. Table 3 shows the overlap between the LPI and the
Emotional Competence Framework published by the Consortium for Research on Emotional
Intelligence.
Table 4 gives a comparison between the LPI framework and the SHL Universal Competency
Framework (Bartram, 2004). The SHL model is based on a synthesis of the company’s own
generic competency models, models in the public domain and the literature. The framework
has 111 competency components which map onto 20 dimensions and relate to 8 higher
order factors--general reasoning ability, the Big Five personality factors, and need for
achievement and need for power or control.
SHL claim that the 20 dimensions are widely important competencies that have been
frequently used by the company in assessment and development centers over two decades.
Bartram states that the 20 competency dimensions provide coverage of the whole
competency domain at a level of detail sufficient for most clients that do not require tailored
competency solutions.
The comparison exercise revealed that the LPI captured the majority of the competencies in
the SHL and CREI frameworks. The LPI has adequate to good coverage of 17 out of 20
dimensions in SHL’s “universal” competency framework. The missing areas are “adhering to
principles and values”, “writing and reporting” and “applying expertise and technology”. The
LPI has adequate to good coverage of 20 out of 25 dimensions in the CREI framework. The
missing areas are “emotional awareness”, “trustworthiness”, “optimism”, “leveraging
diversity” and “conflict management”.
LPI User Manual 6
Table 3. Overlap between LPI and Emotional Competence Framework (ECF)
ECF Key Area
ECF Competency
Self-awareness
Emotional awareness
Self-regulation
LPI Competency
Accurate self-assessment
Learning and developing
Self-confidence
Persuading and influencing
Self-control
Coping with pressure
Trustworthiness
Self-motivation
Conscientiousness
Monitoring quality
Adaptability
Adapting to change
Innovativeness
Creating and innovating
Achievement drive
Achieving goals
Commitment
Achieving goals
Initiative
Initiating activity
Optimism
Social awareness
Empathy
Listening and supporting
Service orientation
Meeting customer needs
Developing others
Coaching others
Leveraging diversity
Social skills
Political awareness
Focusing on the business
Influence
Persuading and influencing
Communication
Communicating
Leadership
Motivating and empowering
Change catalyst
Taking risks
Conflict management
Building bonds
Relating and networking
Collaboration and cooperation
Team working
Team capabilities
Team working
LPI User Manual 7
Table 4. Overlap between LPI and Great 8 Competencies
Great 8 Factor
Great 8 Competency
LPI Competency
Leading and deciding
Deciding and initiating action
Making decisions
Leading and supervising
Motivating and empowering
Working with people
Team working
Supporting and co-operating
Adhering to principles and values
Interacting and presenting
Analyzing and interpreting
Relating and networking
Relating and networking
Persuading and influencing
Persuading and influencing
Presenting and communicating
information
Communicating
Writing and reporting
Applying expertise and technology
Creating and conceptualizing
Organizing and executing
Adapting and coping
Enterprising and performing
Analyzing
Analyzing and interpreting
Learning and researching
Learning and developing
Creating and innovating
Creating and innovating
Formulating strategies and
concepts
Analyzing and interpreting
Planning and organizing
Planning and prioritizing
Delivering results and meeting
customer expectations
Following instructions and
procedures
Adapting and responding to
change
Coping with pressures and
setbacks
Achieving personal work goals and
objectives
Entrepreneurial and commercial
thinking
Meeting customer needs
Monitoring quality
Adapting to change
Coping with pressure
Achieving goals
Focusing on the business
A key theme in the literature is that management and leadership are different, and the
concept model includes management competencies and leadership competencies.
According to Kotter (2013), management is to do with the processes that keep an
organization running—for example, processes such as planning, budgeting, measuring
performance, and problem-solving. The function of management is to “produce products and
services as you have promised, of consistent quality, on budget, day after day, week after
week.”
In the LPI, the scales that measure the competencies Kotter describes can be found in the
Planning and Organizing and Results Orientation clusters—for example, competencies
labeled Analyzing and Interpreting, Making Decisions, Planning and Prioritizing, Monitoring
Quality, Achieving Goals, Meeting Customer Needs, and Focusing on the Business. These
are competencies that managers require to keep an organization functioning efficiently.
LPI User Manual 8
Kotter argues that leadership is to do with “taking an organization into the future, finding
opportunities that are coming at it faster and faster, and successfully exploiting those
opportunities. Leadership is about vision, about people buying in, about empowerment and,
most of all, about producing useful change. Leadership is not about attributes, it’s about
behavior.”
In the LPI, the competency components that capture the emphasis that Kotter and other
leadership experts place on aligning people to the vision and achieving buy-in through
communication, motivation, and inspiration are measured by scales in the Managing
Change, Interpersonal Skills, and Leadership clusters—for example, the scales labeled
Initiating Activity, Taking Risks, Creating and Innovating, Listening and Supporting,
Persuading and Influencing, and Motivating and Empowering.
These scales also measure behaviors in Bass’ (2006) model of transformational
leadership—for example, those to do with influencing people, motivating them, stimulating
them, and treating them as individuals. We are currently carrying out a study examining the
relationship between the LPI scales and Bass and Avolio’s (1995) Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire.
Test format. The LPI inventory is constructed in the format of a typical normative personality
or behavioral style assessment test. Respondents are presented with short competency
statements, and invited to say how far they agree with each statement using a 5-point Likert
scale.
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Example item
I can relate well to all types of people.
The inventory has twenty scales and each scale has eight half items (four positively keyed
and four reverse keyed). The LPI uses Standard Ten (sten) scores to show how a test
taker’s scores compare to those of a large international comparison group.
Factor structure. We have conducted numerous exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) of the
LPI since the measure was first published in 1998. EFA with different extraction methods
and with both orthogonal and oblique rotation has consistently produced a matrix with three
key areas. In the most recent analysis, we carried out EFA with three, four, and five-factor
solutions. These analyses confirmed that a three-factor solution provides the best fit to the
data. The current LPI feedback report is based on the concept model. We plan to offer a
second computer-generated feedback report based on the LPI factor model in 2015.
Job performance. At the end of the online questionnaire, there is an optional form where
respondents are asked to provide information about their job performance. Respondents are
asked to assess their performance over the last year using a four point scale from excellent
to unsatisfactory. Using the same scale, respondents are also asked to report how their line
managers rated their performance.
We used this information to look at the relationship between the LPI scales and job
performance, and we found that all the scales correlated significantly with performance. The
median correlation between the LPI scales and job performance was 0.25 when the selfassessments were used, and the median correlation was 0.22 when the line manager
assessments were used.
We also carried out regression analysis to throw light on which scales were the best
predictors of job performance. A stepwise multiple regression was performed between job
LPI User Manual 9
performance ratings as the dependent variable and the management and leadership
competency scales as the independent variables (see Chapter 5 for details).
The best predictors of performance were the scales labeled Persuading and Influencing,
Monitoring Quality, Planning and Prioritizing, and Making Decisions. Altogether, 14% of the
variability in job performance ratings was predicted by knowing the scores on these scales.
In summary, high performing leaders in the international comparison group are persuasive
and influential, focused on quality, decisive, and skillful planners and organizers.
LPI User Manual 10
2. Administration
The LPI questionnaire is suitable for a range of assessment and development applications
including selection, coaching, training, team building, and career counseling.
2.1 Applications
Selection. LPI interpretive reports about a candidate’s management and leadership style
and competencies provide a structure for interviewers and candidates to discuss a
candidate’s potential strengths and weaknesses. In competency-based selection, the LPI
model provides a framework of twenty competencies to compare candidates against, and
use as the foundation for a competency-based interview.
Assessment and development centers. The LPI profiles also provide a source of
information about a candidate’s leadership level, style, strengths and development needs to
put alongside information from in-tray and group exercises. The interpretive report provides
practical tips and suggestions for performance improvement for participants to consider
alongside feedback from assessors.
Training and development. The LPI questionnaire can help in the development of a
company’s existing staff in individual and group development contexts. The LPI profile
provides a structure for a member of staff and their line manager, mentor, trainer or coach to
explore strengths and development needs. The development section of the interpretive
report provides practical ideas and suggestions for learning and development for trainees to
consider.
Team building. Sharing of LPI profiles can help teams to understand the range of skills and
competencies that the team possesses, and how these might be deployed in projects. The
creation of a LPI team profile may also reveal gaps in the team’s capability and help identify
suitable team development activities.
Coaching and counseling. LPI interpretive reports also provide a suitable structure for a
coach to explore a client’s management and leadership level, style, strengths, and potential
development needs.
2.2 Test Administration
It is important that people who are asked to take the LPI assessment test understand the
purpose and process. Test takers typically want to know what the test measures, how it will
be used, whether they will see their results, and who else will have access to their profiles.
This information could be provided as part of a broader briefing about the assessment
context, or it could be sent out with the invitation email to the online assessment session.
The LPI questionnaire can only be administered online by MySkillsProfile and its partners.
The service for individual customers provides a direct access service for individual
customers to take the questionnaire, pay for the assessment by credit card, and download
(or receive via email) the interpretive report in PDF format.
LPI User Manual 11
The corporate testing service works in a similar fashion except that test takers bypass the
payment element, and test administrators have the option of determining how feedback
reports are handled. The feedback handling options are that interpretive reports are sent to
a) the test administrator, b) the test taker, or c) both the test administrator and test taker.
2.3 Norming
In order to interpret LPI raw scores, we compare an individual’s results against an
international comparison group of people who have answered the questionnaire. The
international comparison group is referred to as the norm group or standardization sample,
and the comparison generates a Standard Ten Score (sten) for each scale.
Chapter 4 gives information about the composition of the norm group for the questionnaire.
The collection of norms from different countries is an ongoing process, and additional norm
tables will be added as required.
LPI User Manual 12
3. Scale Descriptions
3.1 Overview
This section presents information about how to interpret scores from each of the LPI scales.
The information covers a brief description of the meaning of a high, low and medium score,
examples of positively and negatively keyed questionnaire items and fuller behavioral
descriptions covering the potential positive and negative implications of high and low scores.
3.2 Sten Scale
Test-takers’ scores are reported as stens. Sten is short for standard ten. Figure 2 shows how
stens and other commonly used scales map onto the normal distribution curve. The average
range on a sten scale is from 4 to 7 with a score of 4 interpreted as low average and a score
of 7 interpreted as high average. Sixty eight percent of people score in this middle range.
Sixteen percent of people score higher than 7 and sixteen percent score lower than 4.
Figure 2. Sten Scale and its Relationship with the Normal Distribution Curves and
Other Scales
LPI User Manual 13
3.3 How to Interpret Scores
Table 5 provides information on how to interpret sten scores. For example, a manager who
scores 8 on a LPI competency scale will have scored the same as or higher than about 90%
of his or her colleagues. A sten of 8 indicates that the competency is a strength in the
individual’s repertoire and it also indicates that the competency in question is probably a low
priority for development activity. A sten score of 8 (or higher) should not be interpreted as
meaning that the individual has reached the pinnacle of performance, however, because
performance can always be improved even if the individual is one of the best performers in
the organization.
Table 5. Interpretion of LPI Sten scores
Sten
Percentile
Competence
Development need
10
99
9
95
Outstanding strength
Very low
8
90
Definite strength
Low
7
75
Mid-range skill/borderline strength
Average/borderline low
6
60
Mid-range skill
Average
5
40
4
25
Mid-range skill/borderline
weakness
Average/borderline high
3
10
Definite weakness
High
2
5
Possible fatal flaw
Critical
1
1
When interpreting factor scores (ie Managing Change, Planning and Organizing etc),
especially middle range ones, it is particularly important to look at the pattern of primary
scale scores as key factor scores are simply the sum of the primary scale scores. It cannot
be assumed that a middle range factor score implies that the test taker also has middle
range scores on each of the scales that make up the key factor.
LPI User Manual 14
Initiating Activity
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Procrastinates or waits for others to originate
activities, tasks or managerial actions.
Originates activities, tasks or managerial actions.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t usually take the first step.
I act independently when it is necessary.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Seeks support before acting
Follows instructions
Reduces risks
Identifies and develops business opportunities
Gets things done
Acts independently
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Leaves things for others to sort out
Does not act on his/her own
Misses business opportunities
Rushes into things
Acts without consulting others
Takes risks
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much initiative as the average manager.
Displays initiative in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Persuading and Influencing
Learning and Developing
Making Decisions
LPI User Manual 15
Taking Risks
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Sticks to rules and reduces risks.
Bends rules and takes risks.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I challenge rules and procedures.
I respect custom and tradition.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Reduces risks
Follows rules and procedures
Seen as safe pair of hands
Takes risks to create business opportunities
Interprets rules flexibly
Challenges status quo
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Resists change
Interprets rules rigidly
Seen as steady plodder
Takes unnecessary risks
Causes problems and difficulties
Seen as maverick
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much willingness to take risks as the average manager.
Willing to bend the rules and take risks in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Creating and Innovating
Communicating
Initiating Activity
LPI User Manual 16
Creating and Innovating
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Implements other people’s ideas and approaches for
products or services.
Invents new ideas and approaches for products or
services.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I prefer change to occur gradually.
I am a person who originates change.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Happy to implement other’s ideas
Makes incremental changes
Generates a few practical ideas
Originates change
Thinks about doing things differently
Generates novel ideas
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Resists novel solutions
Clings to the status quo
Seen as obstructive
Needs change to stay interested
Creates waves
Loses interest easily
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much capacity to innovate as the average manager.
Displays innovative behaviors in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Initiating Activity
Communicating
Persuading and Influencing
LPI User Manual 17
Adapting to Change
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Responds unbendingly to different people and
situations.
Responds flexibly to different people and situations.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I like to get my own way.
I am prepared to compromise to get agreement.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Defends own position
Gets own way
Perceived as tough and uncompromising
Adapts quickly to change
Responds flexibly to people and situations
Co-operates with people
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Unwilling to give a little
Gets into confrontations
Seen as obstructive and inflexible
Compromises own position
Gives in too easily
Seen as chameleon
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much malleability as the average manager.
Displays agility in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Meeting Customer Needs
Team Working
Listening and Supporting
LPI User Manual 18
Analyzing and Interpreting
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Lacks ability to analyze data and think things through.
Analyses issues and information, thinks
systematically and logically.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t always weigh up options carefully enough.
I analyze the facts rigorously before taking decisions.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Operates on instinct and feel
Uses right side of brain
Spontaneous
Analyses things carefully
Homes in on key issues
Makes logical and rational decisions
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Jumps to conclusions
Misdiagnoses problems
Seen as superficial
Does not use right side of brain
Finds it hard to act spontaneously
Slow to take action when there is little information to
go on
Moderate Scorer
Displays as well-developed analytical thinking skills as the average manager.
Displays a rational and logical approach in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Monitoring Quality
Planning and Prioritizing
Meeting Customer Needs
LPI User Manual 19
Making Decisions
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Tends to prevaricate and avoid taking decisions.
Displays readiness to take decisions quickly when
required.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I avoid taking difficult decisions.
I make sound decisions under pressure.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Takes decisions slowly
Unlikely to take risks
Seen as prudent and careful
Makes decisions quickly
Displays confidence
Accepts responsibility for outcomes
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Frustrating to work for
Holds things up
Seen as hesitant and indecisive
Rushes into decisions
Acts on impulse
Seen as risky
Moderate Scorer
Displays as well-developed decision making skills as the manager.
Appears decisive in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Initiating Activity
Persuading and Influencing
Coping with Pressure
LPI User Manual 20
Planning and Prioritizing
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Acts on impulse and without planning ahead.
Plans and organizes resources efficiently.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I often leave things to the last minute.
I always plan how deadlines are going to be met.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Leaves things to the last minute
Makes things up as he/she goes along
Acts on the spur of the moment
Plans work
Prioritizes tasks
Prepares carefully
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does not anticipate problems and difficulties
Wastes resources
Seen as disorganized
Finds it difficult to act on the spur of the moment
May have difficulty responding when things go
differently to the way they were planned
Seen as inflexible
Moderate Scorer
Displays planning skills as often as the average manager.
Plans and organizes work activities in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Monitoring Quality
Analyzing and Interpreting
Focusing on the Business
LPI User Manual 21
Monitoring Quality
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Prefers to leave the detail to other people.
Pays close attention to quality and detail.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I sometimes leave problems behind me.
I like to get the detail right.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Interested in main goals rather than detail
Allows people to make mistakes
Easy to work for
Has high standards
Gets things right first time
Does job well
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Makes mistakes in the detail
Leaves problems for others to sort out
Loses customers
Alters other people’s work unnecessarily
Frustrating to work for
Seen as inflexible and uncompromising
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much attention to quality and detail as the average manager.
Displays a quality focus in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Planning and Prioritizing
Analyzing and Interpreting
Meeting Customer Needs
LPI User Manual 22
Communicating
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Has difficulty expressing views and ideas.
Comes over as articulate and persuasive.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I am not good with words.
I express my ideas clearly and concisely.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Speaks plainly
Lets others speak first
Seen as down-to-earth
Expresses views clearly and concisely
Makes impact with presentations
Seen as influential and persuasive
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Cannot talk / communicate
Makes poor impression
Seen as reserved and detached
Does not use plain English
Likes sound of own voice
Seen as too silver-tongued
Moderate Scorer
Is as articulate and persuasive as the average manager.
Displays good communication skills in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Persuading and Influencing
Creating and Innovating
Coaching Others
LPI User Manual 23
Listening and Supporting
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Tends to ignore people’s views and ideas, overlooks
people’s feelings and emotions.
Responds to people sensitively, deals with people’s
feelings and emotions.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t give other people much chance to say what
they think.
I make the time to listen to people’s views and ideas.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Difficult to hurt or upset
Prepared to take unpopular decisions
Perceived as thick-skinned
Listens to people’s views and ideas
Responds to people’s problems
Seen as considerate and caring
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Upsets people
Has poor working relationships
Seen as selfish and egotistical
Tolerates poor performance
Taken for a ride
Seen as inexperienced
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much emotional sensitivity as the average manager.
Displays empathy and understanding in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Team Working
Motivating and Empowering
Meeting Customer Needs
LPI User Manual 24
Relating and Networking
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Neglects relationships, operates better independently.
Builds effective relationships, keeps people in the
loop.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I am a bit of a loner.
I relate well to all types of people.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Works well alone
Keeps distance
Reserved and tactful
Develops strong working relationships
Builds rapport quickly
Seen as warm and friendly
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Takes time to build relationships
Does not communicate information
Seen as aloof and unsociable
Gossips about people
Feels lonely in leadership positions
Ignores the task
Moderate Scorer
Relationship management skills as well-developed as those of the average manager.
Displays good relationship management skills in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Persuading and Influencing
Team Working
Initiating Activity
LPI User Manual 25
Team Working
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Weak team player, individual contributor.
Strong team player.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I am a difficult person to work with.
I enjoy being part of a team.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Strong personal performer
Acts independently
Prefers to operate alone
Strong team player
Co-operates with people
Fits in quickly
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does own thing
Does not consult people
Seen as loose cannon
Finds it hard to hold out against group
Avoids confrontations
Seen as weak
Moderate Scorer
Works in a team as well as the average manager.
Displays team working skills in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Listening and Supporting
Coaching Others
Meeting Customer Needs
LPI User Manual 26
Achieving Goals
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Does enough work to get by.
Displays high levels of achievement motivation.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I act as if there is more to life than work.
I am prepared to go at things again and again.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Puts personal life first
Works steadily
Happy with current position
Works hard
Likes challenges
Keen to get on
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does not win business
Seen as passenger
Lacks energy and drive
Rides roughshod over people
Finds it hard to co-operate
Experiences difficulties in personal life
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much achievement drive as the average manager.
Displays energy and drive when wants to achieve a personal goal.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Focusing on the Business
Initiating Activity
Monitoring Quality
LPI User Manual 27
Meeting Customer Needs
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Shows little interest in what the customer wants.
Strives to meet customer needs and expectations.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I get impatient with customers.
I strive for excellence in service delivery.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Assertive with customers
Refuses to be pushed around
Will not be intimidated
Handles customers well
Strives to deliver excellence
Sets quality targets
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Delivers a poor service
Loses sales
Loses customers
Allows customers to be rude
Quality standards exceed requirements
Does not control the money
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much quality focus as the average manager.
Displays customer focus in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Coaching Others
Listening and Supporting
Learning and Developing
LPI User Manual 28
Focusing on the Business
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Shows little awareness of how to manage the
business.
Shows commercial and business acumen.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t know much about the competition.
I watch costs closely.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Focuses on other management issues – for example,
people, service quality
Sets stretching targets
Manages money effectively
Maximizes profitability
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does not manage the money
Runs over budget
Makes a loss
Ignores other important aspects of the business – e.g.
management, marketing etc.
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much business awareness as the average manager.
Displays business awareness in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Initiating Activity
Achieving Goals
Learning and Developing
LPI User Manual 29
Learning and Developing
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Lacks interest in self-development.
Committed to continuous learning and selfimprovement.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t have any specific learning goals.
I seek opportunities to test myself.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Satisfied with current position
Content with work that does not provide learning
opportunities
Content with lot
Identifies opportunities for self-development
Learns from mistakes
Reaches individual potential
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does not learn from mistakes
Does not update skills
Loses employability
Learning activity interferes with performance
Abuses colleagues’ goodwill
Seen as passenger
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much motivation to self-improve as the average manager.
Shows interest in learning new skills when personally motivated.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Coaching Others
Initiating Activity
Persuading and Influencing
LPI User Manual 30
Persuading and Influencing
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Keeps low profile, stays in the background.
Displays charisma and presence, enjoys the limelight.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I lack self-confidence.
I pitch in and lead by example.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Lets others speak first
Displays humility
Adopts low profile
Displays self-confidence
Has authority and presence
Possesses leadership qualities
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Comes over as nervous and unconfident
Does not motivate or inspire
Seen as weak manager
Comes over as arrogant
Puts people off
Seen as smooth-talking
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much charm and presence as the average manager.
Displays self-confidence in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Initiating Activity
Communicating
Coaching Others
LPI User Manual 31
Motivating and Empowering
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Fails to inspire and motivate employees.
Inspires and motivates employees.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t trust people to do the right thing.
I am prepared to let others take the lead.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Keeps tight control
Directs all work
Task oriented
Empowers team members
Delegates tasks effectively
Team members feel motivated and committed
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does not motivate or inspire
Seen as control freak
Employees leave
Assumes people will do what he/she expects
Team members don’t deliver required outcome
Seen as too trusting
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much ability to motivate people as the average manager.
Able to inspire and motivate in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Listening and Supporting
Team Working
Coaching Others
LPI User Manual 32
Coaching Others
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Expects employees to develop themselves.
Coaches and develops people.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I don’t often coach people.
I go out of my way to help people develop.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Focuses on the job
Expects people to develop themselves
Does not tolerate passengers
Gives regular feedback
Coaches staff
Creates learning climate
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Does not develop team members skills
Team performs below capability
Unpopular to work for
Tolerates poor performance
Taken for a ride
Unrealistic about people’s ability to develop
Moderate Scorer
Devotes as much effort to developing employees as the average manager.
Coaches and mentors employees in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Meeting Customer Needs
Learning and Developing
Persuading and Influencing
LPI User Manual 33
Coping with Pressure
Low Scorer
High Scorer
Description
Description
Struggles to manage feelings and emotions.
Manages feelings and emotions effectively.
Typical Item
Typical Item
I get irritable and moody when I am stressed.
I deal with difficult situations calmly.
Key Behaviors
Key Behaviors
Positive Implications
Positive Implications
Worries about getting things right
Takes things seriously
Anxious to please
Handles pressure and stress
Recovers quickly from setbacks
Seen as imperturbable
Negative Implications
Negative Implications
Finds it hard to stay in control
Performs poorly under stress
Seen as anxious and worrying
Misses errors
Overlooks potential problems
Perceived as laid back
Moderate Scorer
Displays as much emotional resilience as the average manager.
Displays resilience in some situations but not others.
Correlations
Positive
Negative
Learning and Developing
Making Decisions
Persuading and Influencing
LPI User Manual 34
4. Norms
4.1 International Comparison Group
The international comparison group was created from a sample of over 28,000 persons who
completed the online assessment at myskillsprofile.com. This incidental sample included
people who had taken the test as individual customers and people who had taken the test as
part of corporate selection and development initiatives. Respondents aged under 16 or over
65 were deleted from the sample. Duplicate cases and cases with missing personal data
were also identified and deleted. A data set of 20,000 cases was then created from two
equally-sized gender data sets. The cases for the gender data sets were selected randomly
using SPSS.
Age. The age distribution of the sample is shown in Table 5. Fifteen percent of respondents
were aged 16-25, about 27% were aged 26-35 and about 22% were aged 46-55. Only 6% of
respondents were in the older 55+ age range. The mean age of the sample was 38.1 with a
standard deviation of 11.
Table 5. Age and Gender Distribution of Norm Group (N=20,000)
Age Band
16-25
26-35
36-45
46-55
56-65
Total
Male
Female
Total
1,558
7.79%
2,741
13.71%
3,092
15.46%
1,996
9.98%
613
3.07%
10,000
50%
1,528
7.64%
2,664
13.32%
2,925
14.63%
2,364
11.82%
519
2.60%
10,000
50%
3,086
15.43%
5,405
27.03%
6,017
30.09%
4,360
21.80%
1,132
5.66%
20,000
100%
Country of origin. Table 6 shows the nationality of respondents. There were 160
nationalities in the international comparison group but the majority of respondents (80%)
were from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia and New Zealand. About fifty
percent of respondents came from the United States, about 20% came from the United
Kingdom and about 10% came from Australia and New Zealand. Six percent of respondents
came from Canada and 3% came from South Africa.
LPI User Manual 35
Table 6. Country of Origin of Respondents (N=20,000)
Country
United States
United Kingdom
Australia and New
Zealand
Canada
South Africa
Rest of the World
Total
Male
Female
Total
5,142
25.71%
1,813
9.07%
826
4.13%
653
3.27%
358
1.79%
1,208
6.04%
10,000
50%
5,543
27.72%
1,902
9.51%
878
4.39%
603
3.02%
267
1.34%
807
4.04%
10,000
50%
10,685
53.43%
3,715
18.58%
1,704
8.52%
1,256
6.28%
625
3.13%
2,015
10.08%
20,000
100%
Ethnic origin. Table 7 shows the distribution by race and ethnicity. Seventy percent
described themselves as White, 9 percent said they were Black, 7 percent reported that they
were Asian, 3 percent said they were Spanish or Latino, 3 % said they were Mixed race and
1% said they were Chinese.
Table 7. Ethnic Origin of Respondents (N=20,000)
Ethnic Origin
White
Black
Asian
Hispanic or Latino
Mixed
Chinese
Other
Total
Male
Female
Total
6,958
34.79%
759
3.80%
897
4.49%
348
1.74%
329
1.65%
72
0.36%
637
3.19%
10,000
50%
7,125
35.63%
965
4.83%
506
2.53%
311
1.56%
314
1.57%
61
0.31%
718
3.59%
10,000
50%
14,083
70.42%
1,724
8.62%
1,403
7.02%
659
3.30%
643
3.22%
133
0.67%
1,355
6.78%
20,000
100%
Industry sectors. Table 8 shows the top twenty sectors represented in the international
comparison group. The largest groups were from education and health services making up
about 30 percent of the sample.
LPI User Manual 36
Table 8. Industry Sectors in LPI General Population Norm Sample (N=20,000)
Sector
Frequency
Percent
Education
3,293
16.47%
Health services
2,469
12.35%
Government
1,416
7.08%
Other services
956
4.78%
Retail/Wholesale
763
3.82%
Sales andamp
574
2.87%
Consulting
561
2.81%
Food/beverage
537
2.69%
Other non-profit
483
2.42%
Engineering
445
2.23%
Accounting
415
2.08%
Telecommunications
399
2.00%
Construction
389
1.95%
Social services
385
1.93%
Other manufacturing
375
1.88%
Transportation
341
1.71%
Computer-related Services
325
1.63%
Computers/software
325
1.63%
Medical/health care devices
324
1.62%
Advertising/marketing
305
1.53%
4.2 Norms Table
Table 9 provides norms for the LPI scales using the Standard Ten (Sten) scoring approach
LPI User Manual 37
Table 9. LPI General Population Norms (N=20,000)
Scale
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Mean
SD
Initiating Activity
8-24
25-27
28-29
30-31
32
33-34
35-36
37
38-39
40
31.43
3.99
Taking Risks
8-18
19-20
21-22
23-24
25
26-27
28-30
31
32-33
34-40
25.36
3.88
Creating and Innovating
8-21
22-24
25-26
27-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37
38-40
29.84
4.06
Adapting to change
8-23
24-25
26-27
28-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36
37-38
39-40
30.86
3.74
Analyzing and Interpreting
8-21
22-24
25-26
27-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37-38
38-40
29.94
4.06
Making Decisions
8-20
21-22
23-24
25-26
27-28
29-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38-40
28.45
4.21
Planning and Prioritizing
8-17
18-20
21-23
24-25
26-28
29-30
31-33
34-35
36-37
38-40
27.74
4.95
Monitoring Quality
8-22
23-24
25-26
27-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38-39
40
30.49
4.25
Communicating
8-19
20-22
23-25
26-28
29-30
31-32
33-35
36-37
38-39
40
29.94
4.81
Listening and Supporting
8-23
24-26
27-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37-38
39
40
32.19
4.04
Relating and Networking
8-19
20-21
22-24
25-26
27-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37-40
27.80
4.20
Team Working
8-23
24-25
26-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37
38-39
40
31.81
4.01
Achieving Goals
8-21
22-23
24-25
26-27
28-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38-40
29.23
3.93
Meeting Customer Needs
8-24
25-27
28-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38
39
40
32.85
3.86
Focusing on the Business
8-21
22-23
24-25
26-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37-38
39-40
29.66
4.17
Learning and Developing
8-24
25-26
27-28
29-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37-38
39
40
32.04
3.88
Persuading and Influencing
8-21
22-24
25-27
28-30
31-32
33-34
35-36
37-38
39
40
31.73
4.71
Motivating and Empowering
8-22
23-24
25
26-27
28-29
30
31-32
33-34
35
36-40
28.65
3.36
Coaching Others
8-23
24-26
27-28
29-31
32
33-34
35-36
37-38
39
40
32.36
4.08
Coping with Pressure
8-19
20-22
23-24
25-27
28-29
30-31
32-34
35-36
37-38
39-40
29.12
4.63
LPI User Manual
38
5. Reliability and Validity
5.1 Reliability
Test scores are reliable when they are reproducible and consistent. If an assessment test
gives significantly different results when it is taken on different occasions, then it is likely to
be unreliable. Because of errors in measurement and human inconsistency, people are not
expected to produce precisely the same results on different occasions. The statistical
measure describing the relationship between the scores is called the reliability coefficient.
Internal consistency reliability. Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha is a frequently used measure
of internal consistency reliability. It gives the average of the correlations between all possible
pairs of items on a scale. Table 10 presents internal consistency estimates for the
questionnaire. The LPI questionnaire has a median scale reliability of 0.71--in the range
defined as adequate by the EFPA Review Model.
Table 10. LPI Internal Consistency Reliabilities (N=20,000)
Scale
Alpha
Mean
SD
Raw Score
SEm
Sten Score
SEm
Initiating activity
0.66
31.43
3.99
2.33
1.23
Taking risks
0.66
25.36
3.88
2.26
1.16
Creating and Innovating
0.73
29.84
4.06
2.11
0.83
Adapting to change
0.70
30.86
3.74
2.05
1.09
Analyzing and Interpreting
0.71
29.94
4.06
2.19
1.03
Making decisions
0.73
28.45
4.21
2.19
0.91
Planning and Prioritizing
0.78
27.74
4.95
2.32
0.85
Monitoring quality
0.66
30.49
4.25
2.48
1.16
Communicating
0.77
29.94
4.81
2.31
0.93
Listening and Supporting
0.78
32.19
4.04
1.89
0.92
Relating and Networking
0.75
27.80
4.20
2.10
1.12
Team working
0.75
31.81
4.01
2.01
0.99
Achieving goals
0.60
29.23
3.93
2.49
1.22
Meeting customer needs
0.69
32.85
3.86
2.15
1.08
Focusing on the Business
0.64
29.66
4.17
2.50
1.22
Learning and Developing
0.66
32.04
3.88
2.26
1.08
Persuading and Influencing
0.78
31.73
4.71
2.21
0.94
Motivating and Empowering
0.64
28.65
3.36
2.02
1.15
Coaching others
0.74
32.36
4.08
2.08
0.93
Coping with Pressure
0.71
29.12
4.63
2.49
1.11
Median
0.71
29.94
4.06
2.20
1.08
LPI User Manual
39
5.2 Standard Error of Measurement
The Standard Error of Measurement (SEm) provides an error band around a score. The SEm
allows us to put confidence bands around the scores of individual test takers. If one standard
error is added to a score and one standard error is subtracted from it, a range is created
within which we can be 68% certain the true score falls. If two standard errors are added to
the score and two standard errors are subtracted from it, a wider range is created within
which we can be 95% certain that the true score falls.
The LPI raw score SEms range from 1.89 to 2.5 with a median SEm of 2.2. This is equivalent
to a primary scale Sten score SEm of approximately 1. This means that there is a 68%
likelihood that the person’s true score on one of the primary competency scales will be 1
Sten either side of the observed score.
5.3 Validity
This section focuses on the construct and criterion validity of the LPI. The evidence for
construct validity is based on information about LPI scale intercorrelations, factor analysis of
LPI and a study of the relationship between LPI and the Emotional Competence Framework.
The evidence for criterion validity is based on analysis of the relationship between LPI scores
and job performance ratings.
Intercorrelations. Table 11 shows the intercorrelations of the LPI scales. The correlations
range from -0.13 to 0.7 with a median correlation of 0.43. Seven out of ten correlations fall
between 0.5 and -0.1 and one fifth of correlations fall between 0.3 and -0.1.
In order to determine how well a personality questionnaire differentiates between the
different dimensions it is designed to measure, it is necessary to correct the correlations for
unreliability. A correlation needs to be divided by the square root of the product of the two
variables’ reliability to determine what the correlation between the two variables would be if
the variables’ reliabilities were perfect. If two scales share less than 50% reliable variance,
then we can be reasonably certain that they are independent.
Table 12 shows the percentage of common reliable variance for the LPI scales. Sixty six
percent of the scale pairs share less than 50% common variance and 30% share less than
25% common variance.
Standard error of difference. The Standard Error of Difference (SEd) helps us determine
the size of the gap that you need to see between a person’s scores on any two scales before
you can conclude that the difference is real. The SEd depends on the reliability of the scales
– the higher the reliability the smaller the SEd is. If there are two full SEds between the
scores on two scales, then there is a 95% likelihood that there is a real difference.
Table 13 shows the SEds for the LPI scales. The SEds range from 1.19 to 1.73 with a
median of 1.49. This means that you need to see a difference of 3 Stens or more before you
can infer that the candidate has more of one trait than the other – for example, John has
more extravert tendencies than agreeable ones.
LPI User Manual
40
Table 11. Intercorrelations of LPI scales (N=20,000)
Scale
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Initiating activity
1.00
0.29
0.60
0.44
0.44
0.61
0.40
0.47
0.56
0.43
0.46
0.39
0.52
0.55
0.55
0.63
0.70
0.36
0.58
0.54
1.00
0.44
0.13
-0.01
0.25
-0.13
-0.12
0.31
0.00
0.10
-0.05
0.07
0.08
0.14
0.20
0.26
0.12
0.17
0.14
1.00
0.45
0.38
0.55
0.24
0.31
0.57
0.32
0.34
0.32
0.42
0.50
0.42
0.53
0.57
0.30
0.55
0.43
1.00
0.38
0.42
0.27
0.31
0.33
0.53
0.31
0.54
0.22
0.54
0.30
0.50
0.40
0.43
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.45
0.57
0.57
0.41
0.45
0.18
0.37
0.40
0.52
0.51
0.51
0.43
0.35
0.49
0.52
1.00
0.39
0.42
0.54
0.30
0.35
0.33
0.44
0.49
0.46
0.50
0.58
0.27
0.51
0.57
1.00
0.63
0.26
0.40
0.25
0.31
0.36
0.43
0.51
0.44
0.35
0.28
0.38
0.42
1.00
0.32
0.39
0.21
0.33
0.49
0.52
0.50
0.46
0.38
0.23
0.45
0.37
1.00
0.31
0.42
0.30
0.42
0.45
0.42
0.48
0.68
0.31
0.56
0.43
1.00
0.39
0.63
0.19
0.60
0.35
0.59
0.43
0.62
0.59
0.49
1.00
0.47
0.28
0.37
0.33
0.41
0.56
0.34
0.42
0.40
1.00
0.23
0.56
0.30
0.49
0.43
0.52
0.57
0.45
1.00
0.39
0.55
0.42
0.48
0.13
0.41
0.32
1.00
0.48
0.60
0.52
0.47
0.66
0.51
1.00
0.52
0.51
0.30
0.46
0.46
1.00
0.60
0.49
0.64
0.59
1.00
0.40
0.63
0.55
1.00
0.50
0.43
1.00
0.51
Taking risks
Creating and innovating
Adapting to change
Analyzing and interpreting
Making decisions
Planning and prioritizing
Monitoring quality
Communicating
Listening and supporting
Relating and networking
Team working
Achieving goals
Meeting customer needs
Focusing on the business
Learning and developing
Persuading and influencing
Motivating and empowering
Coaching others
Coping with pressure
1.00
LPI User Manual
41
Table 12. Common Reliable Variance of LPI Scales (N=20,000)
Scale
Initiating activity
Taking risks
Creating and innovating
Adapting to change
Analyzing and interpreting
Making decisions
Planning and prioritizing
Monitoring quality
Communicating
Listening and supporting
Relating and networking
Team working
Achieving goals
Meeting customer needs
Focusing on the business
Learning and developing
Persuading and influencing
Motivating and empowering
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
0.19
0.75
0.42
0.41
0.77
0.31
0.51
0.62
0.36
0.43
0.31
0.68
0.66
0.72
0.91
0.95
0.31
0.69
0.62
0.40
0.04
0.00
0.13
0.03
0.03
0.19
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.05
0.09
0.13
0.03
0.06
0.04
0.40
0.28
0.57
0.10
0.20
0.58
0.18
0.21
0.19
0.40
0.50
0.38
0.58
0.57
0.19
0.56
0.36
0.29
0.35
0.13
0.21
0.20
0.51
0.18
0.56
0.12
0.60
0.20
0.54
0.29
0.41
0.48
0.50
0.39
0.59
0.69
0.31
0.37
0.06
0.26
0.38
0.55
0.57
0.56
0.33
0.27
0.46
0.54
0.27
0.37
0.52
0.16
0.22
0.20
0.44
0.48
0.45
0.52
0.59
0.16
0.48
0.63
0.77
0.11
0.26
0.11
0.16
0.28
0.34
0.52
0.38
0.20
0.16
0.25
0.32
0.20
0.30
0.09
0.22
0.61
0.59
0.59
0.49
0.28
0.13
0.41
0.29
0.16
0.31
0.16
0.38
0.38
0.36
0.45
0.77
0.20
0.55
0.34
0.26
0.68
0.08
0.67
0.25
0.68
0.30
0.77
0.60
0.43
0.39
0.17
0.26
0.23
0.34
0.61
0.24
0.32
0.30
0.12
0.61
0.19
0.49
0.32
0.56
0.59
0.38
0.37
0.79
0.45
0.49
0.04
0.38
0.24
0.52
0.79
0.50
0.50
0.85
0.53
0.64
0.52
0.22
0.45
0.47
0.70
0.57
0.84
0.74
0.32
0.69
0.55
0.53
0.41
Coaching others
0.50
Coping with pressure
LPI User Manual
42
Table 13. SEds of LPI scales (N=20,000)
Scale
Initiating activity
Taking risks
Creating and innovating
Adapting to change
Analyzing and interpreting
Making decisions
Planning and prioritizing
Monitoring quality
Communicating
Listening and supporting
Relating and networking
Team working
Achieving goals
Meeting customer needs
Focusing on the business
Learning and developing
Persuading and influencing
Motivating and empowering
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1.23
1.27
1.34
1.12
1.30
1.22
1.32
1.33
1.11
1.31
1.22
1.29
1.28
1.24
1.20
1.27
1.15
1.22
1.17
1.34
1.40
1.19
1.37
1.29
1.38
1.40
1.19
1.37
1.29
1.35
1.34
1.31
1.27
1.34
1.23
1.29
1.24
1.44
1.23
1.40
1.33
1.41
1.43
1.23
1.41
1.32
1.39
1.38
1.34
1.31
1.37
1.26
1.32
1.28
1.30
1.46
1.40
1.48
1.49
1.30
1.47
1.39
1.45
1.44
1.41
1.38
1.44
1.33
1.39
1.35
1.26
1.19
1.28
1.30
1.07
1.27
1.18
1.25
1.24
1.20
1.16
1.23
1.11
1.18
1.13
1.36
1.44
1.46
1.26
1.44
1.35
1.41
1.41
1.37
1.34
1.40
1.29
1.35
1.31
1.37
1.39
1.18
1.37
1.28
1.34
1.34
1.30
1.27
1.33
1.22
1.28
1.23
1.47
1.27
1.45
1.37
1.43
1.42
1.39
1.35
1.41
1.31
1.37
1.32
1.29
1.46
1.38
1.44
1.44
1.40
1.37
1.43
1.33
1.38
1.34
1.27
1.17
1.24
1.23
1.19
1.16
1.23
1.10
1.17
1.12
1.36
1.42
1.41
1.38
1.35
1.41
1.30
1.36
1.32
1.34
1.33
1.29
1.26
1.32
1.21
1.27
1.22
1.39
1.36
1.32
1.39
1.28
1.34
1.29
1.35
1.32
1.38
1.27
1.33
1.28
1.28
1.34
1.23
1.29
1.25
1.31
1.20
1.26
1.21
1.26
1.32
1.28
1.21
1.16
Coaching others
1.22
Coping with pressure
LPI User Manual
43
Factor analysis. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was carried out following best practice
identified by Costello and Osborme (2005). Maximum likelihood extraction with orthogonal
and oblique rotations was carried out using SPSS on the LPI scales with 20,000
respondents from the standardization sample.
The graph of the eigenvalues (Figure 3) indicates that there are four data points above the
break point in the data where the curve flattens out. We ran multiple analyses varying the
number of factors and varying the rotation methods. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of
sampling adequacy for these solutions was 0.95, well above 0.6 required for a sound
analysis. Communality values ranged from 0.75 to 0.45 with a median value of 0.59.
Figure 3. Scree Plot for Maximum Likelihood Extraction
Table 14 shows loadings of the scales on the factors for three, four, and five-factor solutions
using oblique rotation. A three-factor solution has the “cleanest” factor structure judged by
the strength of loadings and the number of cross-loadings on each factor--that is, item
loadings of at least 0.32 (10 percent overlapping variance), few item cross-loadings, and no
factors with fewer than three items.
The first three factors in each of the solutions are quite similar. Seven scales load on the first
factor in each solution: Listening and Supporting, Team Working, Motivating and
Empowering, Adapting to Change, Coaching Others, Meeting Customer Needs, and
Learning and Developing. Five scales load on the second factor in each solution: Taking
Risks, Creating and Innovating, Communicating, Persuading and Influencing, and Initiating
Activity. Five scales load on the third factor in each solution: Monitoring quality, Planning
and Prioritizing, Analyzing and Interpreting, Focusing on the Business, and Achieving Goals.
The main difference between the three solutions is the movement of a small number of
scales into a fourth, or fourth and fifth factor. For example, in the four and five-factor
solutions, the Relating and Networking scale becomes the highest loading scale in a fourth
factor, and in the five-factor solution, the Coping with Pressure scale becomes the highest
loading scale in a fifth factor.
LPI User Manual 44
Table 14. Rotated Solutions for 3, 4, and 5 Factor Extractions (N=20,000)
3-Factor
4-Factor
5-Factor
Scale
1
2
3
Initiating activity
0.49
-0.38
Taking risks
0.61
0.71
0.66
Creating and innovating
0.60
0.52
0.56
Adapting to change
0.61
1
2
3
0.37
0.35
0.61
Analyzing and interpreting
0.44
1
2
3
0.37
0.33
0.67
-0.41
0.39
0.40
-0.35
-0.77
0.75
0.66
Monitoring quality
-0.84
0.82
0.82
0.59
Listening and supporting
0.90
Relating and networking
0.36
Team working
0.79
Meeting customer needs
0.85
-0.70
0.72
0.51
0.52
-0.41
0.33
-0.61
0.47
-0.72
0.71
-0.58
0.53
Persuading and influencing
0.48
0.33
Focusing on the business
Learning and developing
0.46
0.85
0.32
Achieving goals
-0.35
0.53
0.56
0.32
0.59
0.53
0.45
0.59
5
0.56
Planning and prioritizing
Communicating
4
0.55
-0.62
Making decisions
4
0.41
0.36
0.36
-0.46
Motivating and empowering
0.78
0.74
0.70
Coaching others
0.56
0.52
0.56
Coping with pressure
0.40
0.38
-0.40
-0.90
Loadings below 0.32 are omitted. Secondary loadings above 0.32 are shown in italic.
LPI User Manual 45
Relationship between LPI and Emotional Competence Framework. A study of the
relationship between the LPI and the Emotional Competence Framework (ECF) was
conducted to establish whether the LPI measures competencies similar to those assessed
by the ECF. The ECF is a generic competence framework distilling findings from a range of
recognized academic and government sources. We constructed an expanded questionnaire
with marker items drawn from the ECF. One hundred and ninety two respondents completed
this questionnaire.
Table 15 shows that correlations between LPI scales and the markers ranged from 0.51 to
0.88 with a median correlation of 0.77. A median correlation above 0.75 is classified as an
excellent construct validity rating by the EFPA Review Model.
Table 15. Correlations between LPI and Emotional Competence Framework markers
(n=192)
Scale
Correlation
Marker
Initiating activity
0.83
Initiative
Taking risks
0.66
Initiative
Creating and innovating
0.81
Change catalyst
Adapting to change
0.76
Adaptability
Making decisions
0.70
Self-confidence
Planning and prioritizing
0.51
Collaboration and cooperation
Monitoring quality
0.86
Conscientiousness
Communicating
0.81
Influence
Listening and supporting
0.82
Empathy
Relating and networking
0.74
Building bonds
Team working
0.80
Team capabilities
Achieving goals
0.77
Achievement drive
Meeting customer needs
0.88
Service orientation
Focusing on the business
0.78
Political awareness
Learning and developing
0.81
Accurate self-assessment
Persuading and influencing
0.70
Self-confidence
Motivating and empowering
0.74
Leadership
Coaching others
0.72
Developing others
Coping with pressure
0.75
Self-control
Median
0.77
All correlations significant at 0.01 level.
Relationship between LPI and Transformation Leadership Behavior. Transformational
leadership behavior was measured using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Short
Form (MLQ 5X) (Bass & Avolio, 1995). The MLQ 5X is widely used to assess
transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles and consists of 36 items.
Ten items from the MLQ 5X Short Form were used to examine the relationship between
transformational leadership behavior and the LPI variables (Table 16). Respondents
completing the LPI were asked to assess how frequently they displayed each of the 10 items
of behavior in the LPI 5-point Likert scale.
LPI User Manual 46
Table 16. Transformational Leadership Marker Variables
Scale
Item*
I go beyond self-interest for the good of the group
Idealized influence (attributes)
I display a sense of power and confidence
I consider the moral and ethical consequences of decisions
Idealized influence (behaviors)
I emphasize the importance of having a collective sense of mission
I articulate a compelling vision of the future
Inspirational motivation
I express confidence that goals will be achieved
I seek differing perspectives when solving problems
Intellectual stimulation
I get others to look at problems from many different angles
I spend time teaching and coaching
Individualized consideration
I help others to develop their strengths
*Rephrased to fit the style of LPI management and leadership items.
Six hundred and thirty five respondents completed the LPI questionnaire with the marker
variables online. Fifty eight percent of respondents were men and 42 percent were women.
The average age of respondents was 41.7 with a standard deviation of 11.7.
In the EFPA review model, correlations between 0.55 and 0.64 are defined as adequate
evidence of congruent validity, correlations between 0.65 and 0.74 are defined as good, and
correlations at 0.75 and above are defined as excellent.
Table 17 reveals a pattern of robust correlations between the LPI scales and the marker
variables. The correlation between the LPI total score and the total score of the marker
variables is 0.82, and nearly all of the correlations in the table fall within the ranges defined
as adequate or good in the EFPA review model. This data presents strong evidence that the
LPI assesses key aspect of transformational leadership behavior.
Table 17. Correlations between LPI Scales and Transformation Leadership Behavior
Marker Variables (n=635)
Idealized
influence
(attributes)
Idealized
influence
(behaviors)
Inspirational
motivation
Intellectual
stimulation
Individualized
consideration
Marker
variable
total
0.56
0.56
0.72
0.55
0.62
0.77
0.48
0.51
0.57
0.45
0.50
0.64
0.45
0.55
0.57
0.49
0.52
0.66
0.52
0.58
0.60
0.54
0.54
0.71
Leadership
0.50
0.64
0.62
0.63
0.66
0.78
LPI total
0.58
0.66
0.71
0.62
0.66
0.82
Scale
Managing
change
Planning and
organizing
Interpersonal
skills
Results
orientation
All correlations significant at 0.01 level.
LPI User Manual 47
Correlation between LPI and job performance ratings. Table 18 shows the correlations
between LPI scale scores and job appraisal ratings. Respondents were asked to report how
their manager assessed their performance at their last performance appraisal using a 4-point
scale (excellent, good, satisfactory, poor) and to assess their own performance and the sum
of the manager’s assessment and the test taker’s self-assessment.
The correlations between the competency scales and self-assessed job performance range
from -0.05 to 0.30 with a median of 0.25. All the correlations are statistically significant. The
strongest correlation is with Persuading and Influencing. The correlations between the
scales and line-manager job performance range from 0.06 to 0.25 with a median of 0.22. All
the correlations are statistically significant. The strongest correlation is with Persuading and
Influencing and Initiating Activity.
Table 18. Correlations between LPI scores and Job Appraisal Ratings
Scale
Self-Assessment
(N=19,221)
Managerial Assessment
(N=18,162)
Initiating activity
0.28
0.25
Taking risks
0.05
0.06
Creating and innovating
0.23
0.21
Adapting to change
0.19
0.19
Analyzing and interpreting
0.23
0.20
Making decisions
0.28
0.24
Planning and prioritizing
0.27
0.22
Monitoring quality
0.28
0.24
Communicating
0.26
0.23
Listening and supporting
0.18
0.18
Relating and networking
0.18
0.16
Team working
0.17
0.16
Achieving goals
0.21
0.16
Meeting customer needs
0.25
0.23
Focusing on the business
0.26
0.20
Learning and developing
0.26
0.24
Persuading and influencing
0.30
0.25
Motivating and empowering
0.16
0.16
Coaching others
0.27
0.24
Coping with pressure
0.26
0.23
Median
0.25
0.22
All correlations significant < 0.001
We used multiple regression to throw more light on the relationship between LPI
competency scores and job performance. Table 197 presents the results from regression of
LPI scale scores on self-assessed job performance ratings using the standardization group.
The best predictors of performance were Persuading and Influencing, Monitoring Quality,
Planning and Prioritizing and Making Decisions. Altogether, 14% of the variability in job
performance ratings was predicted by knowing the scores on these scales.
LPI User Manual 48
Table 19. Regression of LPI Scale Scores on Job Performance Ratings
Adjusted
R
Square
Std.
Error of
the
Estimate
R
Square
Change
F
Change
df1
df2
Sig. F
Change
Model
R
R
Square
Persuading and Influencing
0.30
0.09
0.09
0.63
0.09
1933.67
1
19,219
0.00
Persuading and Influencing, Monitoring Quality
0.35
0.12
0.12
0.62
0.03
674.39
1
19,218
0.00
Persuading and Influencing, Monitoring Quality,
Planning and Prioritizing
0.36
0.13
0.13
0.62
0.01
176.22
1
19,217
0.00
Persuading and Influencing, Monitoring Quality,
Planning and Prioritizing, Making Decisions
0.37
0.14
0.14
0.62
0.01
112.05
1
19,216
0.00
LPI User Manual 49
6. Group Comparisons
6.1 Gender
At the primary scale level, there are very small but statistically significant differences in 18
out of 20 scales (Table 20). Men have very slightly higher scores on Achieving Goals,
Motivating and Empowering, Coping with Pressure, Focusing on the Business, Taking Risks
Analyzing and Interpreting, Making Decisions, Communicating, Creating and Innovating and
Initiating Activity. Women have very slightly higher average scores on Relating and
Networking, Learning and Developing, Monitoring Quality, Team Working, Adapting to
Change, Planning and Prioritizing, Listening and Supporting, Coaching Others, Meeting
Customer Needs and Persuading and Influencing.
The largest differences are in Achieving Goals, Motivating and Empowering, Coping with
Pressure and Focusing on the Business where men score higher; and, in Coaching Others,
Meeting Customer Needs and Persuading and Influencing where women score higher.
Table 20. LPI Means and Standard Deviations of Men and Women (N=20,000)
Men
Women
Scale
Significance
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Initiating activity
31.48
4.08
31.37
3.89
0.05
Taking risks
25.76
3.91
24.96
3.81
0.00
Creating and innovating
30.11
4.05
29.56
4.06
0.00
Adapting to change
30.59
3.78
31.13
3.68
0.00
Analyzing and interpreting
30.33
4.09
29.56
3.99
0.00
Making decisions
28.79
4.23
28.11
4.16
0.00
Planning and prioritizing
27.47
5.09
28.02
4.79
0.00
Monitoring quality
30.35
4.38
30.63
4.11
0.00
Communicating
30.24
4.78
29.64
4.82
0.00
Listening and supporting
31.80
4.20
32.58
3.83
0.00
Relating and networking
27.76
4.28
27.84
4.11
0.20
Team working
31.62
4.13
32.01
3.88
0.00
Achieving goals
32.66
4.02
28.86
3.91
0.00
Meeting customer needs
30.11
4.25
33.04
3.69
0.00
Focusing on the business
31.99
4.02
29.22
4.05
0.00
Learning and developing
32.00
4.74
32.09
3.73
0.07
Persuading and influencing
28.50
3.46
31.46
4.67
0.00
Motivating and empowering
32.30
4.21
28.79
3.26
0.00
Coaching others
29.66
4.64
32.42
3.95
0.03
Coping with pressure
31.48
4.08
28.57
4.57
0.00
LPI User Manual 50
6.2 Age
LPI competencies are desirable work behaviors refined through experience so it would be
reasonable to see a positive relationship with age. Table 21 confirms that such a relationship
exists. There are positive correlations with age in 19 out of 20. The highest correlation is only
0.20, however, indicating that age accounts for less than 4% of the variation in scale scores.
The largest differences were in Meeting Customer Needs, Motivating and Empowering and
Coaching Others.
Table 21. Correlations of LPI scores with Age (N =20,000)
Scale
Age
Significance
Initiating activity
0.07
0.00
Taking risks
0.14
0.00
Creating and innovating
0.14
0.00
Adapting to change
0.12
0.00
Analyzing and interpreting
0.13
0.00
Making decisions
0.13
0.00
Planning and prioritizing
0.05
0.00
Monitoring quality
0.01
0.14
Communicating
0.14
0.00
Listening and supporting
0.08
0.00
Relating and networking
-0.03
0.00
Team working
0.08
0.00
Achieving goals
-0.04
0.00
Meeting customer needs
0.20
0.00
Focusing on the business
0.06
0.00
Learning and developing
0.08
0.00
Persuading and influencing
0.07
0.00
Motivating and empowering
0.19
0.00
Coaching others
0.17
0.00
Coping with pressure
0.08
0.00
6.3 Ethnic Origin
Table 22 shows differences in LPI scores by ethnic origin. There are statistically significant
differences between the groups but the differences are very small. The median differences in
mean scale scores range from 0.55 to -0.98. The Black and Chinese groups differ most from
the general population norm group as a whole. Blacks tended to score slightly higher on the
LPI scales than the norm group as a whole--the median difference in mean scale scores is
0.55. Chinese tended to score lower—the median difference in mean scale scores is -0.98.
LPI User Manual 51
6.4 Nationality
Table 23 shows LPI scores by nationality. There are statistically significant differences
between the country groups but, as with ethnicity, the differences are very small. The median
differences in mean scale scores range from 0.29 to -0.74. The rest of the world countries
differed most from the global population norm group as a whole--the median difference in
mean scale scores was -0.74. Respondents from the United States and South Africa tended
to have slightly higher scores on the scales whereas the United Kingdom and Australia
tended to have slightly lower scores.
LPI User Manual 52
Table 22. LPI Scores by Ethnic Origin
White
Asian
Black
Chinese
Mixed
Hispanic
All Races
Scale
Sig
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Initiating activity
31.51
3.87
30.79
4.34
31.59
4.07
29.67
4.88
31.19
4.42
31.64
4.23
31.43
3.99
0.00
Taking risks
25.55
3.93
24.94
3.52
24.54
3.65
24.82
3.51
25.33
3.90
24.74
3.81
25.36
3.88
0.00
Creating and innovating
29.88
4.04
29.41
4.21
29.76
4.00
28.05
4.65
29.85
4.09
30.10
4.10
29.84
4.06
0.00
Adapting to change
31.06
3.63
29.51
3.89
30.77
3.89
29.09
3.62
30.59
3.92
31.10
3.92
30.86
3.74
0.00
Analyzing and interpreting
29.78
3.96
30.24
4.27
30.90
4.14
29.65
4.79
29.88
4.34
30.17
4.30
29.94
4.06
0.00
Making decisions
28.57
4.16
28.00
4.31
28.04
4.17
27.06
4.82
28.21
4.15
28.98
4.37
28.45
4.21
0.00
Planning and prioritizing
27.62
4.91
28.37
4.93
28.17
4.98
27.47
5.20
27.59
5.10
28.38
5.42
27.74
4.95
0.00
Monitoring quality
30.47
4.20
30.38
4.49
30.93
4.29
29.53
4.54
30.09
4.45
30.72
4.36
30.49
4.25
0.00
Communicating
30.01
4.72
28.93
5.10
30.50
4.94
27.79
5.03
30.01
4.81
29.98
5.17
29.94
4.81
0.00
Listening and supporting
32.13
3.95
32.06
4.38
32.90
4.00
31.38
4.79
31.93
4.35
32.45
4.25
32.19
4.04
0.00
Relating and networking
27.84
4.12
27.92
4.54
27.55
4.32
26.71
4.97
27.76
4.15
28.09
4.50
27.80
4.20
0.00
Team working
31.81
3.94
31.61
4.34
32.06
3.96
30.83
4.27
31.44
4.16
32.31
4.28
31.81
4.01
0.00
Achieving goals
29.01
3.90
29.83
4.04
30.40
3.79
28.32
4.11
29.11
4.18
29.81
4.02
29.23
3.93
0.00
Meeting customer needs
32.82
3.77
32.57
4.26
33.47
3.78
31.83
4.58
32.52
4.33
33.10
3.92
32.85
3.86
0.00
Focusing on the business
29.48
4.14
30.14
4.17
30.42
4.07
29.80
4.58
29.53
4.53
30.09
4.40
29.66
4.17
0.00
Learning and developing
31.89
3.79
32.16
4.13
32.87
3.84
31.62
4.44
31.94
4.29
32.61
4.06
32.04
3.88
0.00
Persuading and influencing
31.64
4.65
31.52
5.03
32.65
4.53
29.59
5.20
31.68
5.02
32.50
4.87
31.73
4.71
0.00
Motivating and empowering
28.59
3.31
28.27
3.50
29.39
3.38
28.17
4.07
28.43
3.57
28.88
3.48
28.65
3.36
0.00
Coaching others
32.36
3.98
31.98
4.55
32.89
3.96
30.63
4.95
32.13
4.46
32.54
4.48
32.36
4.08
0.00
Coping with pressure
29.02
4.55
28.84
5.09
30.05
4.60
28.17
4.97
29.09
4.79
29.61
4.89
29.12
4.63
0.00
White=14083, Black=1724, Asian=1403, Hispanic=659, Mixed=643, Chinese=133.
LPI User Manual 53
Table 23. LPI scores by Nationality
All Countries
SD
Rest of the
World
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
31.53
3.95
30.38
4.47
31.43
3.99
0.00
3.94
25.96
3.99
25.20
3.77
25.36
3.88
0.00
30.05
4.19
30.54
4.33
29.31
4.27
29.84
4.06
0.00
3.37
30.99
3.74
29.74
3.58
29.12
3.87
30.86
3.74
0.00
29.63
3.97
29.82
4.17
30.56
3.94
29.64
4.24
29.94
4.06
0.00
4.01
28.25
4.18
28.52
4.34
28.55
4.15
27.70
4.31
28.45
4.21
0.00
27.36
4.94
27.37
4.83
27.69
5.05
27.88
4.79
27.60
4.88
27.74
4.95
0.00
4.14
29.98
4.24
29.80
4.23
30.40
4.41
30.68
4.25
29.69
4.44
30.49
4.25
0.00
30.16
4.79
29.80
4.69
29.85
4.70
29.94
4.82
30.04
5.06
29.09
5.01
29.94
4.81
0.00
Listening and supporting
32.47
3.95
32.06
3.91
31.82
4.01
32.18
4.15
31.99
3.98
31.36
4.54
32.19
4.04
0.00
Relating and networking
27.88
4.17
27.93
4.00
27.58
4.25
27.78
4.18
27.63
4.44
27.38
4.54
27.80
4.20
0.00
Team working
32.10
3.95
31.64
3.82
31.60
3.79
31.97
4.16
30.98
4.11
30.97
4.50
31.81
4.01
0.00
Achieving goals
29.47
3.86
28.93
4.02
28.63
3.88
28.77
4.04
29.83
4.02
29.11
3.98
29.23
3.93
0.00
Meeting customer needs
33.18
3.81
32.52
3.69
32.69
3.68
32.71
3.99
33.00
3.76
31.90
4.29
32.85
3.86
0.00
Focusing on the business
30.02
4.13
28.88
4.12
29.06
4.08
29.51
4.18
30.59
4.08
29.54
4.31
29.66
4.17
0.00
Learning and developing
32.38
3.78
31.38
3.81
31.64
3.78
32.16
3.96
32.34
3.79
31.58
4.31
32.04
3.88
0.00
Persuading and influencing
32.24
4.58
30.86
4.66
31.07
4.73
31.86
4.82
32.06
4.66
31.01
5.05
31.73
4.71
0.00
Motivating and empowering
28.84
3.35
28.38
3.19
28.57
3.30
28.64
3.43
28.97
3.24
28.06
3.67
28.65
3.36
0.00
Coaching others
32.64
3.98
32.01
3.98
32.22
3.99
32.38
4.35
32.76
3.95
31.48
4.57
32.36
4.08
0.00
Coping with pressure
29.56
4.60
28.50
4.52
28.64
4.57
29.07
4.63
29.32
4.57
28.27
4.79
29.12
4.63
0.00
United States
United Kingdom
Australia and NZ
Canada
South Africa
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
Initiating activity
31.92
3.86
30.76
3.91
30.92
3.86
31.50
4.00
Taking risks
25.04
3.88
25.86
3.89
25.94
3.73
25.82
Creating and innovating
29.82
3.91
29.73
4.21
30.42
4.14
Adapting to change
31.18
3.75
30.94
3.54
31.05
Analyzing and interpreting
30.28
3.99
29.24
4.05
Making decisions
28.71
4.22
28.18
Planning and prioritizing
27.96
4.96
Monitoring quality
30.93
Communicating
Scale
Sig.
United States=10,685, United Kingdom=3,715, Australia and New Zealand=1,704, Canada=1,256, South Africa=625, Rest of the World=2,015.
LPI User Manual 54
References
Anastasi, A. (1988). Psychological testing (Sixth Edition). New York: Macmillan.
Baron, H. (1996). Strengths and Limitations of Ipsative Measurement. Surrey, UK: Saville
and Holdsworth Ltd Group plc.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 49-56.
Bartram, D. (2002). EFPA Review Model for the Description and Evaluation of Psychological
Tests: Notes for Reviewers. www.efpa.be: European Federation of Psychologists’
Associations.
Bartram, D. (2004). The SHL Universal Competency Framework. SHL Business Issues
Series 2004, Issue no.4.
Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the
vision. Organizational Dynamics, (Winter): 19-31.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA:
Mind Garden.
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership (Second ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Belbin, R. M. ((1981). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. London: Heinemann.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competent manager: A model for effective performance. New
York: Wiley.
BPS. (1992). Psychological testing: A guide. Leicester: The British Psychological Society.
Cattell, R. B., Eber, H.W., and Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). Handbook for the sixteen personality
factor questionnaire (16PF). Illinois: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.
Cheetham, G. and Chivers, G. (1996). Towards a holistic model of professional competence.
Journal of European Industrial Training, 20/5, 20-30.
Chivers, W. and Darling, P. (2001). The Feedback Project: Improving Performance through
Effective Dialogue. University of Surrey Roehampton: School of Business, Computing and
Technogy.
Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t.
New York, NY: Harper Business.
Costello, Anna B. & Jason Osborne (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four
recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research &
Evaluation, 10(7). Available online: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7
LPI User Manual 55
Cronbach, L.J. (1990). Essentials of psychological testing (Fifth Edition). New York: Harper
Row.
Disability Discrimination Act (1995). London, UK: The Stationary Office.
Ducci, M. A. (1996). Training for employability. Geneva: ILO Enterprise Forum.
HR-BC/IRS (1996). Annual survey of competency frameworks. Competency, 4,1.
Kirton, M.J. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: a description and measure. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 61, 622.
Kotter, J. P. (1982). What effective general managers really do. Harvard Business Review,
Nov-Dec, 156-167.
Kotter, J.P. (2013). What Leaders Really Do. Harvard Business Press Books.
Kotter, J.P. (2013). Management Is (Still) Not Leadership. HBR Blog Network.
Marcovitch, J. (1996). Implications for enterprises of a changing world economy. Geneva:
ILO Enterprise Forum.
McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than intelligence. American
Psychologist, 28, 1-14.
Minztberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York: Harper Row.
MCI.
(1992). Middle management standards. London: Crown Copyright.
Pedler, Burgoyne and Boydell. (1978). A manager’s guide to self-development. New York:
McGraw Hill.
Peters, T. and Waterman, R. (1982). In search of excellence. New York: Harper Collins.
Reynolds, M. and Snell, R. (1988). Contribution to the development of management
competence. Sheffield: Manpower Services Commission.
Rosier, R. H. and Jeffery, P. (Eds.) (1994). The Competence Model Handbook (Vol. 1-3).
Boston: Linkage Incorporated.
Russell, M. T. and Karol, D. L. (1994). The 16PF Fifth Edition Administrator's Manual. Illinois:
Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.
SHL (1999). OPQ32 Manual and User’s Guide. Surrey, UK: Saville and Holdsworth Ltd
Group plc.
Sawyer, C. and Kabacoff, R. (1997). Developing Assessment Instruments: MRG’s Unique
Approach to Questionnaire Design. MRG Practice Guide.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London:
Maurice Temple Smith.
Schroder, H. M. (1989). Managerial competence: The key to excellence. Dubuque, IA:
Kendall/Hunt.
Spencer, L.M. and Spencer, S.M. (1993). Competence at Work: Models for Superior
Performance. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
LPI User Manual 56
LPI User Manual 57
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertisement