This round of pet peeves is focused on assessments. The kind where you answer a bunch of multiple choice questions and it spits out an assessment definition about you. Now these pet peeves are not targeted at one specific assessment tool out there. They are my general annoyances when it comes to assessments
- Labeling. Even with lots of questions, when I can only choose from 3-5 options, there is a bias. Heck, sometimes, I find myself even trying to game the answers to see what I’ll get as I’m taking the dang test. And if the options are 1-5 (low to high), what’s my definition of high versus your definition. Humans are just too complex for that. But I would be ok with it in general, if the result wasn’t a label of your identity but informational. I think Leadership Circle & Comparative Agility are positive examples of doing assessments without labeling you a “x” in the end (ok, I won’t list ones that annoy me but I’ll make a plug for the ones that don’t). That here is trends, here is things to consider, or here is potential challenges. Those are the assessments I can get behind. Not the ones that say “you are x and you will always be x”. Ugh. Not true.
- Complexity. Building off that, rarely does anyone fit nicely into a labeled box. You are x, She is y, They are z. More likely, you are x and a little y. Humans are too complex to be binary. Sure we read the label and we can “see ourselves” in the description because their is true in that box, but to pretend you are not in any other boxes is insanity. I can see a little of myself in various categories of an assessment because I’m a complex human and depending on the situation, etc I show up differently. I don’t mind the label & box if it’s just to help a conversation but if it starts to be used as an identity, I truly think you are not honoring the complexity of who you are and can be.
- Weaponization. Too often, I’ve watched teams complete the binary labeled assessments. And then almost immediately the weaponization language begins, “oh that’s so x of you”, “well that’s because you need y and I am z”, etc. As if these labels are the excuse/blame that we need to not collaborate, address conflict, or whatever. And somehow by using the label, we accept this behavior. This is not communication. This is not reinforcing the value. This is taking information and turning it into a weapon, sometimes against others and at the worst, against yourself.
As much as these are pet peeves, they are mine, and as a leader that doesn’t mean, I get to simply judge others. Instead, these serve as opportunities for others and for me to grow. If this stuff was easy, I wouldn’t be sharing.
What are your assessment pet peeves?
