PI UPDATE
WHY DIVERSITY ON ITS OWN IS NOT ENOUGH
Diversity is often associated with stronger teams, better decisions, and more innovation. Research has consistently shown that bringing together people with different backgrounds, experiences, perspectives, and ways of thinking increases the range of ideas available to the team. But diversity on its own does not guarantee better outcomes; greater differences can also mean more disagreement, misunderstanding, and friction. People may approach decisions differently, communicate in ways that clash, or have very different expectations of how work should get done. The potential is there, but whether that potential becomes valuable depends on what happens next.
FROM DEMOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY TO
BEHAVIOURAL UNDERSTANDING
When organisations discuss diversity, the conversation often starts with demographic diversity. But the differences we experience every day at work go much further than things like gender, nationality or age. As we discussed in last month’s newsletter, trying to understand a person based on their age group (Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, etc.) can be tempting, but such labels are not founded in research and are also way too broad to be useful in day-to-day interactions. Two people with similar backgrounds can have completely different ways of communicating, making decisions, handling risk, responding to structure, or interacting with others. These differences are often less visible than demographic characteristics, but they strongly influence how people experience one another at work. Understanding behavioural differences adds another layer to the inclusion conversation.
THE PITFALLS OF ASSUMING WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING
Creating a diverse team is one thing. Creating an environment where those differences can really contribute is another. Inclusion is sometimes reduced to making sure everyone is invited into the room, but being present does not necessarily mean feeling able to contribute. People also need to feel that they can ask questions, challenge an idea, offer a different perspective, and work in a way that is different to everyone around them. That requires curiosity, belonging, and mutual understanding. Without that understanding, differences can easily turn into misunderstandings and friction. The colleague who asks question after question may be seen as difficult rather than thorough, and someone pushing for a quick decision may appear impatient rather than action oriented. A person who needs time to consider an idea may be interpreted as resistant while someone who challenges the group may be labelled negative when they are actually identifying a risk that others have missed.
HARMONY SHOULD NOT BE THE ONLY GOAL
Some tension is inevitable when people think, communicate, and work differently. That is not necessarily a bad thing. A team where everybody immediately agrees can be comfortable, but comfort is not always the same as effectiveness. Different perspectives can expose blind spots, improve decisions, and challenge assumptions. This creates diversity of thought. The goal should therefore not be to eliminate differences or disagreement for the sake of harmony. It should be to make those differences easier to understand and work with. A tool like The PI Behavioral Assessment can help you understand why people behave as they do and how these different approaches to work can be valuable. This paves the way for a more inclusive mindset. The behaviour didn’t change; the interpretation did.
DIVERSITY CREATES THE POTENTIAL.
INCLUSION MAKES IT USABLE
The goal is not that people should become more alike. It is to create enough shared understanding that people can remain different while still working effectively together. Tools like PI can support this by giving teams a shared language for discussing behavioural differences. Of course, a behavioral assessment does not create inclusion on its own; what matters is the conversation that follows. Whether people become more curious. Whether colleagues ask instead of assuming. Whether leaders make room for different ways of contributing. Diversity is not valuable simply because differences exist. Diversity creates the potential. Inclusion turns that potential into something a team can use.
NEWS FROM THE PREDICTIVE INDEX
UPDATED INSTRUCTIONS TO THE PI COGNITIVE ASSESSMENT
With the rapid rise of the use of AI, Predictive Index have updated the instructions to The PI Cognitive Assessment to discourage the use of AI. The instructions now include the sentence ‚Getting help from other people and/or using AI assistance on the assessment is not permitted.‘
The design of the CA makes it very diffucult to cheat or use AI as it uses a linear- on-the-fly (LOFT) design to ensure each candidate receives a unique set of items. The order of the items as well as the order of the four possible responses is also randomised.
The design of the CA has always made it difficult to cheat as it uses a linear- on-the-fly (LOFT) design to ensure each candidate receives a unique set of questions. The order of the questions as well as the order of the possible responses is also randomised. While no online assessment can completely prevent the use of AI or other forms of assistance, the PI Cognitive Assessment includes several features designed to maintain the integrity of assessment results and discourage misuse.
The CA incorporates anti-cheating measures during the 12-minute test, such as blurring the screen and blocking copy-paste if a candidate navigates away. Together, these non-disruptive security enhancements help reduce opportunities for sharing answers and support the validity of assessment results.
Clients can consider administering a second CA in a controlled environment where they can monitor the completion of the assessment if they want to double-check
that the first CA was completed without assistance from AI or other people. No questions from the first CA will be repeated in a second CA sent to the same email address.
If you choose to administer a second CA, we strongly encourage you to do so for all your candidates and not just for the ones who score very high (or very low). This will ensure fair and equal treatment of your applicants.
Client can also consider adding a custom text in the email invitation to take the cognitive assessment, such as:
„As part of our recruitment process, we ask you to complete a cognitive assessment. Please complete the assessment independently and without the use of AI tools or any other external assistance.
Please also note that, should you progress further in the recruitment process, you may be asked to complete an additional cognitive assessment under supervised conditions. This may be used to validate the results of the initial assessment. Thank you for your understanding.“
As always, we recommend discussing the results of a cognitive assessment with the candidate, asking them about their experience and strategy. You can also consider asking directly if they had any help or used AI. Such questions help verify authenticity without creating unnecessary complexity in your process.
Reach out to your PI Consultant if you have further questions about the PI Cognitive Assessment.
