How COMET Breaks Through the Challenges of Self-Assessment
by Patrick Merlevede, jobEQ's leading researcher
A series of at least 10 psychological
studies done between 1976 and 1990 shows that many people tend to overestimate
their abilities. We tend to think of ourselves as having better leadership
skills, more intelligence and a better life than our peers. This theory
and other problems with human reasoning are well explained in the book
"How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday
Life" by Thomas Gilovich (1991). Gilovich writes: "We are inclined
to adopt self-serving beliefs about ourselves, and comforting beliefs
about the world." and he cites Francis Bacon: "Man prefers to
believe what he prefers to be true."
Thus, even if people being tested would be willing to give a fair view
of their competencies, my expectation is that self-assessment is an unreliable
form of measuring one's level of competence. Unfortunately, this has been
confirmed several times when jobEQ used competency questionnaires in recruiting
and coaching. So why did we then develop the COMET/EQ questionnaire, which
asks people about their abilities?
The answer is only as a demonstration! Yes, the first version
of the COMET/EQ questionnaire is a self-assesment questionnaire, which
contains statements related to emotional intelligence. This demonstration
gives you an idea about the experience of filling out a questionnaire,
but differs from the "real thing" in two important aspects.
First, the "real" use of any COMET questionnaire is 360°
feedback. This means that your peers, bosses, collaborators, and subordinates
are asked to assess you. These results are then aggregated, giving a more
neutral impression than self-assesment. Secondly, people trained to use
the COMET methodology have learned a specific form of behavioral-based
interviewing. They use interview techniques to check upon the results
of the questionnaire. From experience, we know that these interviews give
more accurate results than self-assessment.
Another issue is the content of the questionnaire. This was also originally
for demonstration purposes! While we know that these statements accurately
define emotional intelligence, these sample statements may or may not
be relevant for you the competencies you need for your job. It is different
for every job. To put it another way: For some jobs, a bad score on this
questionnaire is correlated with high performance! That's why
the standard use of the COMET methodology prescribes that an organization
builds its own questionnaires, based upon interviews with the top performers
doing that job.
To jobEQ, the COMET methodology is more important than the software.
It represents the latest evolution of self- and peer-assessment. Even
though COMET/EQ was developed as a demonstration, and for use with academic
research, is has also been made available for commercial purposes
(e.g. for assessing EQ as part of an Emotional Intelligence training program).
If you want to test competencies, whether via 360° feedback or behavior-based
interviewing, our partners
can help you execute this process in a scientifically sound way.
Back to COMET
Back to Research
last modified: 2006/Aug/07 17:57 CEST
Printer-Friendly Version
