This document discusses how certain personality traits, while strengths, can become weaknesses if taken to an extreme. It defines "career limiters" as personality clusters that may slow career advancement, and "derailers" as those that could end a promising career early. It emphasizes managing expectations of new hires, using data-driven role profiles, and providing structured feedback to minimize derailment risks. Key takeaways are that organizations can unintentionally encourage derailment; using personality data mindfully along with development support can help address this.

1. Personality
You can have too much of a good
thing…
Dr. Richard A MacKinnon
Head of Learning & Development Solutions

2. Overview
• What does personality tell us about candidates?
• How should we use it?
• The nature of Derailment
• Strengths and unintended consequences
• Managing Derailment risks

3. What does personality data
tell us?

4. What does personality data tell us?
• An indication of how a candidate is likely to behave
• It augments the data from ability tests
• Results should be prefaced with “all things being equal…”
• All things are not equal!
• They represent hypotheses to be tested at interview
• These data are not for “selecting out”

5. How should we use
Personality data in selection?

6. How to use personality data
• To inform competency-based interviews
• For comparison against pre-defined “ideal” profiles
• To identify alignment with role requirements, culture
• To identify strengths and development areas
• To feed back into selection criteria for subsequent intakes
• As part of feedback to unsuccessful candidates

7. Can you have too much of a good thing?
• Put simply, yes.
• Employers typically adopt a threshold approach to selecting employees.
• This is represented by looking for “just enough” or “more than” on a
range of personality traits.
• Unless used mindfully, this approach neglects the risks associated with
“too much” of some aspects of personality.
• These form the basis for either career limiters or derailers.

8. The nature of Derailment

9. Derailment
• Fundamentally, an over-reliance on key strengths
• Reinforced behaviours, over-used or in wrong context
• Derailment doesn’t occur instantly or in a vacuum
• Usually, “blame” needs to be shared by various parties
• Derailment factors represent risks not inevitabilities

10. Derailment
• Derailment can be facilitated in various ways, including:
• You recruit “extreme” personalities and let them run amok in the
organisation
• Your high potential programmes exacerbate pre-existing negative
behaviours
• Lack of rounded development leaves employees unprepared for
significant organisational or contextual change

11. Derailment:
An example of unintended
consequences…

12. Is Derailment even relevant for
graduates?

13. Is derailment even relevant for graduates?
• Overwhelming, yes!
• You can unintentionally set them up for later derailment through
• Talent attraction messages
• Selection criteria
• Reinforced behaviours
• Performance management
• Provision of development support

14. What are employers looking for?
Our analysis of graduate role profile templates illustrates that graduate
recruiters consistently emphasise some personality traits over others
Most important Moderately Important Least Important
Conscientious Methodical Supportive
Communicative Decisive Consultative
Influencing Achievement-oriented Relaxed
Socially Confident Flexible Resilient
Analytical Conceptual Creative

15. Derailment could be facilitated by:
• Ignoring clear behavioural issues while “performance” is excellent
• Encouraging development and focus on a sub-set of traits, rather than a
more rounded development plan
• Rewarding attainment of KPIs and ignoring “softer” development needs
• Waiting until too late before engaging in development or addressing
unhelpful behaviours

16. Derailment in Action

17. “Career Limiters” and “Derailers”
• Certain clusters of behavioural preferences can be actively encouraged
by organisations, but can simultaneously represent “double-edged
swords”.
• Our model posits two ends of each scale:
• “Career limiters” represent clusters of behaviour which can serve to
delay or even prevent career advancement
• “Derailers” are behaviours which can bring a promising career to an
early end

18. Derailment risks
Hyper-
sensitivity
Isolation Eccentricity Iconoclasm
Exhibitionism
Over-
confidence
Over-
dependence
Micro-
Management

19. Hyper-sensitivity
Lacking sensitivity and
subtlety of perception
Shrewd
perception and
judgment
Emotional
fragility,
anxiety,
paranoia

20. Eccentricity
Conservative thinking,
sticks to convention,
“lazy” thinking
Unconventional,
creative,
develops novel
ideas
Poor listeners,
focused on
novelty over
substance

21. Iconoclasm
Too passive and complacent,
swayed by majority, focused
on others’ opinions
Tough-minded,
able to break with
convention, make
difficult decisions
Excessive rule-
breaking, intolerant
and insensitive to
others

22. Over-confidence
Modest, avoiding leadership
roles, avoiding competition
and negotiation
Confidence, self-
belief, drive and
competitiveness,
positive self-
concept
Arrogance, lack of
self-awareness or
own limitations,
need to win and
eclipse others

23. Micro-management
Unreliable and careless in
detail, rules and processes.
Rely on spontaneity rather
than planning
Highly methodical
and structured,
paying attention to
data and evidence.
Conscientious.
Inflexible
adherence to rules,
details and
processes.
Analysis paralysis.

24. Managing the Risk of
Derailment

25. Managing the Risk of Derailment
• We can minimise the risk of Derailment through:
• Managing expectation of applicants
• Using data-driven role-profiles
• Providing structured and balanced on-boarding feedback

26. Managing Expectations
• We can sometimes make problems for ourselves by over-selling the roles that
applicants will actually fill
• Role descriptions and other messaging can (and do!) impact who applies
• We can be over-optimistic about the responsibilities they can reasonably be
expected to take on
• We can present a sunny-side up picture of the organisation and the role
• Consider presenting a more balanced picture and emphasise the hard work but
also the rewards.
• Presenting a more realistic preview of an employee’s journey through the ranks
allows them to picture how their potential can be realised

27. Data-driven role profiles
• Be sensitive to the potential downside of what look like strengths.
• Consider what sort of profiles you are selecting against and keep an eye
out for extreme personalities.
• They shouldn't be a sole deciding factor, but should be factored in to on-
boarding and development activities
• Consider the design of assessment exercises in assessment centres
• Use a data-driven approach to developing role profiles - as opposed to
gut feel.

28. Provision of onboarding feedback
• Recognition of both strengths and development areas
• Flag up “extreme” personality traits to increase awareness
• Ensure graduates have a realistic perspective of what is required and
what is acceptable
• Ensure alignment with your colleagues in Learning & Development

29. Linking Recruitment and Development
Robust selection
methods
On-boarding and
development
exploration
Identification of
Potential
Development
Support
Validation and
Feedback into
selection

30. Key take-aways

31. Key take-aways
• You can have too much of a good thing when it comes to personality
• We can unintentionally set up graduates for future derailment
• Use of data-driven profiles, clear messaging and development can help
manage these risks
• Reflection on what actually predicts success is required
• Use personality data mindfully

32. Thank you.
richardmackinnon@talentq.co.uk