Introduction

Recently in discussions with an HR leader responsible for multiple geographies with a large multinational, on the topic of leadership selection he mentioned that ‘outcome orientation’ and ‘bringing the team along to deliver on the desired outcomes’ are the most important selection criteria which I thought summed things up quite nicely. But what more goes into identifying a good leader? Is it enough to just focus on outcome orientation and team motivation? Is there more?

 The selection of a leader is a critical process that often involves a blend of intuition, experience, and evidence. While my team’s focus is typically to hire a digital leader or a leader for a technology company, leadership selection and recruitment as we all know is a fairly critical activity for any organisation, not just digital agencies and technology companies. Neuroscience offers ways for enhancing this process by providing insights into the neural mechanisms underlying leadership behaviours and I thought it might be interesting to add this lens to leadership selection. 

Assessing Leadership Potential: A Neuroscience-Informed Approach

Leadership is a multifaceted construct that involves a range of behaviours, including motivating others, inspiring vision, and fostering collaboration. Neuroscience research has begun to explore the neural correlates of leadership. For example, studies have found that leaders often exhibit heightened activity in brain regions associated with empathy, social cognition, and theory of mind. These neural characteristics enable leaders to understand and connect with others, fostering trust and cooperation.

Additionally, leaders who are able to effectively regulate their emotions and maintain emotional stability may be more likely to inspire confidence and trust in their followers. Research has shown that emotional intelligence, a combination of self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, and social skills, is a key predictor of leadership success.

By understanding how candidates show up in the areas of decision-making, emotional regulation, and social interaction, organizations can develop more effective ways to assess for leadership level selection.

Decision-Making

• Risk Tolerance: Observe how candidates respond to hypothetical scenarios involving uncertainty and ambiguity. Do they remain calm and collected, or do they become overly anxious or impulsive?
• Problem-Solving: Assess candidates’ ability to break down complex problems into smaller, more manageable components. Do they approach problems systematically, or do they rely on intuition alone?
• Future Orientation: Evaluate candidates’ ability to think long-term and consider the potential consequences of their decisions. Do they have a clear vision for the future, or are they more focused on short-term gains?

Emotional Intelligence

• Self-Awareness: Look for candidates who are aware of their own emotions and how they influence their behaviour. Do they acknowledge their strengths and weaknesses?
• Empathy: Observe how candidates interact with others. Do they show genuine concern for the feelings and perspectives of their colleagues?
• Regulation: Assess candidates’ ability to manage their emotions effectively, especially under stress. Do they remain calm and composed in challenging situations?

Social Cognition

• Theory of Mind: Evaluate candidates’ ability to understand the thoughts, feelings, and intentions of others. Do they actively seek to understand different perspectives?
• Persuasion: Assess candidates’ ability to communicate effectively and influence others. Do they have a strong command of language and a persuasive style?
• Collaboration: Observe how candidates work with others. Do they build strong relationships and foster a collaborative environment?

Aspects to Consider when Devising the Leader Selection Process

There are however certain thing to keep in mind when developing the candidate selection process and to assess leadership potential. 

The Value of Human Judgment

• Intuitive Understanding: Individuals with hands-on experience and familiarity with day-to-day challenges often possess an intuitive understanding of what it takes to succeed in a leadership role. Their judgment is informed by real-world knowledge and practical experience, rather than solely relying on theoretical constructs.
• Contextual Awareness: Experienced individuals can assess candidates in the context of the organization’s specific needs and culture. They can identify candidates who are likely to thrive in the given environment and contribute effectively to the team’s goals.

The Limitations of Psychometric Tests

• Potential for Discrimination: Psychometric tests can inadvertently perpetuate biases and discrimination. Cultural differences, socioeconomic factors, and individual learning styles can influence test performance, leading to unfair assessments of candidates.
• Limited Predictive Validity: While psychometric tests can provide some insights into cognitive abilities, they may not accurately predict future performance in real-world leadership roles. Leadership involves a complex interplay of cognitive, emotional, and social factors that may not be fully captured by standardized tests.

The Role of System 1 and System 2 Thinking

• System 1 Thinking: This is a fast, intuitive, and emotional mode of thinking that relies on heuristics and stereotypes. While it can be helpful in making quick decisions, it can also lead to biases and errors.
• System 2 Thinking: This is a slower, deliberate, and rational mode of thinking that involves careful analysis and evaluation. System 2 thinking is essential for making complex decisions and avoiding cognitive biases.

Limitations of Technology in Leadership Selection

While technology is useful in allowing for a fair and open process for candidate applications, deploying virtual assessment platforms and AI tools for candidate selection is often not the best way to assess leadership potential. A significant concern is the prevalence of biases built into these systems. Many experienced leaders have reported being unfairly rejected by automated platforms due to inherent biases that fail to recognize their unique strengths and experiences. There are biases in technology-driven assessments such as 

• Cultural Bias: AI algorithms trained on data from predominantly Western cultures may struggle to accurately assess candidates from diverse backgrounds, potentially overlooking qualified individuals from non-Western cultures.
• Gender Bias: Historical biases against women in leadership roles can be inadvertently perpetuated by AI algorithms trained on data that reflects these biases.
• Cognitive Bias: Algorithms may be susceptible to cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias or anchoring bias, which can lead to inaccurate assessments.

Implications for Hiring

• Balanced Approach: A balanced approach to hiring should combine the strengths of both human judgment and objective evidence. By leveraging the insights from neuroscience while considering the limitations of traditional methods and technology, organizations can make more informed and equitable hiring decisions.
• Holistic Assessment: Assess candidates across a range of dimensions, including cognitive abilities, emotional intelligence, social skills, and cultural fit through a multi-stage process. Consider their past experiences, achievements, and potential for growth.
• Structured Interviews: Conduct structured interviews that focus on specific competencies and behaviours relevant to the leadership role. Use behavioural questions to assess candidates’ ability to apply their skills and knowledge to real-world situations.
• Project Work for Specialist Roles: By incorporating challenges and projects into the candidate selection process, organizations can gain a deeper understanding of candidates’ skills, abilities, and potential fit for specialist roles. Its also a great way to observe how a candidate would address a challenge in the real world as well as engage with others.
• Reference Checks: Seek feedback from previous employers, colleagues, and mentors to gain insights into an individual’s performance and potential.

Conclusion

While neuroscience offers valuable insights into the neural mechanisms underlying leadership, it’s essential to approach hiring a leader with a balanced perspective. Technologies need to be deployed at the right stage of the process and must not restrict your candidate pool due to its built in biases. Human judgement informed by understanding of the role requirements and where possible real-life, hands on experience around what it would take to succeed in a role, have proven to be good ways to select a leader.  After all identifying a leader who can change the trajectory of your organisation is no mean task.