An employee who is told that they need to become more proactive, more confident in times of change or better at collaborating is often left with a difficult question: What should I do differently on Monday? Developing employees with personality tests can make development discussions more concrete. Not by labelling people, but by creating a shared and structured language for working styles, motivations and behaviours within the role.
For HR professionals and managers, the greatest value comes when test results are linked to the actual requirements of the organisation. A personality test should not determine who is a good or bad employee. It should provide a basis for understanding how different people are likely to behave in workplace situations – and which conditions, forms of feedback and development initiatives can help them achieve better results.
Why develop employees with personality tests?
Many development plans are based on a manager’s impressions, individual events and the employee’s own perspective. These perspectives are important, but rarely sufficient on their own. Managers observe behaviours within a limited part of day-to-day work, while employees may find it difficult to distinguish between what feels natural and what actually works effectively in their role.
A well-designed, work-relevant personality test adds a third perspective. It can reveal patterns that may be difficult to identify in an ordinary conversation: the need for structure, tendency to take initiative, decision-making style, persistence, ability to manage stress, orientation towards collaboration or willingness to challenge established ways of working. When interpreted professionally, the results become a basis for dialogue rather than a definitive answer.
This is particularly useful when an organisation wants to develop existing employees to meet new demands. An experienced salesperson, for example, may need to lead a larger customer team. A site manager may need to manage more stakeholders and increasingly complex priorities. A specialist may be expected to take greater responsibility for coordination. In all these situations, it is not enough to know that the person performs well in their current role. The organisation needs to understand which strengths can be developed further and which risks need to be managed.
From test profile to development at work
The crucial factor is not completing the test, but what happens afterwards. A profile without feedback is simply data. Feedback without a connection to actual work tasks may be interesting, but is unlikely to create meaningful change.
Start with a clear analysis of the role and the situation the employee is developing towards. Which behaviours are critical for success? Is it creating structure in a changing environment, making decisions with incomplete information, building trust within the team or driving issues forward despite resistance? The requirements need to be specific enough to translate into everyday workplace behaviours.
The test results then need to be placed in context. A high level of attention to detail can be a clear strength in quality-critical processes, but it may also mean that the employee needs to practise making decisions that are good enough when the pace is high. A strong desire to influence others can be valuable in leadership and sales, but may need to be balanced with active listening. The same characteristic can therefore be either an asset or a challenge depending on the role, assignment and working environment.
This is where a job-specific comparison profile makes a difference. Instead of viewing results as generally high or low, HR professionals and managers can compare them with the characteristics that are most relevant to the specific role. This provides a fairer and more useful basis for development.
Make feedback respectful and actionable
Providing feedback on personality requires sound judgement. Employees should understand the purpose, know how the information will be used and have the opportunity to reflect on whether the results correspond with their own experiences. The test should never be used to impose a particular self-image or justify a decision that has already been made.
A good feedback discussion moves between the profile, specific situations and practical actions. A manager might ask: In which situations do you notice that you become most focused on detail? When does that help you? When does it slow the team down? What would be a reasonable way to try a different approach over the next few weeks?
The goal is not for employees to change their personality. The goal is to increase self-awareness and give them a broader range of effective ways to respond when the role requires it.
A development plan that can be followed up
Development initiatives are often too broad. A statement such as “develop your leadership” provides little practical guidance. A better plan focuses on one or two behaviours that are important for results and can be practised in day-to-day work.
For a new manager with strong drive but a limited tendency to involve others, the plan might include preparing questions before each weekly meeting, asking two people for their perspectives before major decisions and summarising how their input has influenced priorities. For an employee who tends to avoid uncertainty, the plan might instead involve taking responsibility for a clearly defined improvement initiative, with clear parameters and regular follow-up.
A useful development plan answers four questions:
- Which behaviour should be strengthened or balanced?
- In which workplace situations should it be practised?
- What support does the employee need from their manager, team or training?
- When and how should the impact be followed up?
Follow-up should focus on observable changes and work results, rather than whether the person has become “more right”. Have meetings become more decisive? Has collaboration between functions improved? Does the employee take initiative in the right situations? Have quality or delivery speed improved? Questions like these keep the focus on business value.
When personality tests are not enough
Personality is an important factor in performance, but it is not the only one. Competence, experience, motivation, workload, leadership, authority and organisational culture can be equally influential in many situations. If an employee struggles to prioritise, the cause may be unclear objectives or too many competing tasks rather than individual characteristics.
Test results should therefore be combined with structured discussions, workplace performance, relevant competence assessments and a clear understanding of the organisation’s expectations. When assessing individuals for more complex roles, logical ability and the ability to handle verbal, numerical or complex information may also be relevant. The methods required depend on the role and the decision being made.
There are also situations where caution is necessary. A test should not be used as a tool to explain conflicts from one perspective only, assess medical issues or exclude people who do not match a manager’s personal preferences. Professional use requires informed consent, relevant data protection, trained users and a method with documented validity and reliability.
For organisations seeking to work strategically over the long term, independent quality assessment is also relevant. Assessment tools reviewed according to established standards, for example within EFPA’s test review model and DNV’s quality assurance processes, provide a stronger basis for selecting methods that genuinely support work-related decisions.
Build internal expertise for long-term development
A single test can improve a development discussion. A shared methodology can improve an organisation’s ability to develop talent over time. When HR professionals and managers are trained in interpretation, feedback and role analysis, quality becomes less dependent on individual managers. Employees also receive a more consistent experience, regardless of department or manager.
In this context, JobMatch Talent can be used as an in-depth basis for assessing working styles, development potential and fit against clearly defined role requirements. However, the tool is only one part of the process. The real impact occurs when the results are translated into developmental assignments, training, feedback and follow-up from a manager who understands both the individual and the organisation.
The most constructive next step is often a small one: choose a real workplace situation where the employee wants to achieve better results, identify a behaviour to try and follow up on what happens. In this way, the personality test becomes more than a report stored in a system – it becomes a well-founded tool for development that creates a visible difference in day-to-day work.