Latest / The Inspired Stories Podcast / The Science of Success: Dr. Ryne Sherman on Understanding Human Potential | Staffing Series

Transcript

The Science of Success: Dr. Ryne Sherman on Understanding Human Potential | Staffing Series · The Inspired Stories Podcast

• 0:03
  Welcome to another edition of the Inspired Stories podcast,
• 0:07
  where leaders share their experiences so we can learn from
• 0:10
  their successes and be inspired by how they've overcome
• 0:13
  adversity. My name is Anthony Cotespotti,
• 0:16
  and today's guest is Doctor Ryan Sherman, chief science officer
• 0:20
  at Hogan Assessments. They pioneered personality
• 0:24
  assessments to improve workplace performance and have assessed
• 0:27
  over 11 million people worldwide.
• 0:31
  They focus on using data-driven insights to help organizations
• 0:35
  succeed and are committed to diversity and inclusion.
• 0:40
  Under Ryan's leadership, the team continues to build on their
• 0:43
  strong reputation, delivering talent management solutions and
• 0:46
  driving industry innovation. Ryan earned his PhD in
• 0:50
  psychology from the University of California, Riverside and
• 0:54
  previously served as an associate professor at Texas
• 0:58
  Tech University and Florida Atlantic University.
• 1:02
  He brings a passion for advancing scientific research
• 1:05
  and his background in academia has been key to Hogan's success.
• 1:10
  Awards and recognition for Ryan and the organization highlight
• 1:13
  their dedication to progress and excellence.
• 1:16
  He is also the Co host of the Science of Personality podcast,
• 1:21
  which explores the topics of personality, leadership and
• 1:24
  organizational effectiveness with a new episode every two
• 1:28
  weeks. Now before we get into all that
• 1:30
  good stuff, today's episode is brought to you by my company,
• 1:35
  Add Back Benefits Agency, where we offer very specific and
• 1:38
  unique employee benefits that are both great for your team and
• 1:42
  fiscally optimized for your bottom line.
• 1:44
  One recent client was able to add over $900 per employee per
• 1:48
  year in extra cash flow by implementing one of our
• 1:52
  innovative programs. Results vary for each company
• 1:54
  and some organizations may not be eligible.
• 1:57
  To find out if your company qualifies, contact us today at
• 2:00
  AD back benefitsagency.com. Now back to our guest today, the
• 2:04
  Chief Science Officer of Hogan Assessments, Ryan Sherman.
• 2:08
  I appreciate you making the time to Share your story today.
• 2:11
  Well, thanks for having me and Anthony.
• 2:12
  Real pleasure to be here. OK, Ryan, so tell us simply, in
• 2:16
  your own words, what exactly does Hogan assessments do?
• 2:21
  Sure. Yeah.
• 2:22
  So Hogan assistance really helps organizations solve 2 critical
• 2:26
  problems around talent issues. The 1st is how to find the right
• 2:30
  talent, how to identify the right talent for the right role
• 2:34
  in those positions. Because we're all different in a
• 2:36
  in a variety of ways. And every role calls for
• 2:39
  different kinds of skills, a different kind of knowledge.
• 2:41
  And so helping organizations identify who's the right person
• 2:45
  for that job, that's one step of what we would call a talent
• 2:49
  identification or selection. The other thing that we help
• 2:51
  organizations do is develop their current talent on the
• 2:54
  inside, typically in the level of leadership kind of roles.
• 2:58
  So we know leadership is absolutely critical to
• 3:01
  organizational success. Leaders have more impact on the
• 3:04
  organizations outcome than anybody else.
• 3:06
  So developing those leaders to have the right skill set to be
• 3:09
  more effective in the organization is essential.
• 3:12
  And we help organizations do that.
• 3:14
  And we do both of those things through the use of
• 3:16
  scientifically validated personality assessments, which
• 3:19
  help us sort of understand what makes you tick, what drives you,
• 3:22
  what are you skilled at, what areas might you struggle in that
• 3:25
  you need a little more help development around that.
• 3:27
  And that's the the essentially what we do at Hogan.
• 3:30
  So you've got clients who come to you and say, listen, we've
• 3:34
  got a whole bunch of hiring needs.
• 3:36
  We want your help in evaluating some of the prospects that we're
• 3:39
  looking at. Are the assessments that you're
• 3:42
  using roughly the same at the core, regardless of what the
• 3:47
  industry is that you're assisting?
• 3:50
  Yeah, it's a great question, Anthony.
• 3:52
  I really like that because actually not a lot of people ask
• 3:54
  us that that kind of stuff. But yes, in fact, that's one of
• 3:57
  the the sort of the beauties of of our business is that once you
• 4:00
  sort of understand the entire personality landscape, that's
• 4:03
  kind of all there is you need to know once you've assessed all of
• 4:06
  those individual qualities. And, and I, I take a lot of
• 4:09
  pride in the fact that our assessments really are
• 4:11
  comprehensive in their nature. They're, some people will tell
• 4:14
  you our assessments take a long time.
• 4:16
  Some people will tell you our reports are really extensive and
• 4:18
  they're really long. And there's so many scales and
• 4:21
  so many subscales. And that's, that's true.
• 4:23
  That's because personality is pretty complex.
• 4:25
  We're all very different from each other in lots of different
• 4:28
  ways. Our assessments grab all of that
• 4:31
  information. But the good news is once you
• 4:33
  have that, that information, there's really 3 core
• 4:35
  assessments. One of those we, we call
• 4:38
  measures the insides, your values, your motives, what
• 4:40
  drives you. Another one we call your bright
• 4:43
  side. That's, that's you.
• 4:45
  When you're being your best, that's you putting your best
• 4:47
  foot forward. That's the you that most people
• 4:49
  get to know right away when they first meet you.
• 4:52
  And then the last one is, is our dark side assessment.
• 4:55
  This is the one that that gets the you that's sort of there all
• 4:58
  along, but doesn't always show up.
• 5:00
  It sort of shows up when you're under stress or when you're
• 5:03
  unable to sort of manage your, the impression that you're
• 5:05
  making upon others. And once we have those three
• 5:09
  pieces of information, we can really fit that with any job,
• 5:13
  any role. In fact, we have done that.
• 5:16
  We have data on every single job in the US economy, most jobs in
• 5:20
  the global economy. So once we have that core pieces
• 5:24
  of personality information, we can really understand that for
• 5:27
  any kind of job. So that's the beauty of our of
• 5:30
  our suite of assessments is that we can give the same set of
• 5:32
  assessments and answer many different questions.
• 5:36
  So thinking about those 3 categories, what drives you,
• 5:40
  bright side, dark side it it's interesting in, in terms of like
• 5:44
  the structure and how you think about that, what drives you.
• 5:47
  I can sort of conceptualize like questions that would help help
• 5:50
  to get at that bright side. I get that.
• 5:53
  But it's like the version of me that you're getting right now,
• 5:55
  right? Like you're meeting me for the
• 5:57
  first time. I'm hosting a podcast here and
• 5:59
  I, I can see how you would get questions that would kind of
• 6:02
  bring that out. But the dark side, that one
• 6:04
  confuses me a little bit because I'm still I, I get that you want
• 6:08
  to see how I am under pressure or under or under stress, but
• 6:12
  how do you flesh that out during a personality assessment?
• 6:16
  Because I'm in a relaxed, controlled environment, You you
• 6:20
  know, I'm not having my buttons pushed in at that time.
• 6:24
  Yeah, the really interesting thing, and you're making a
• 6:26
  really good point there, Anthony, is it might seem like,
• 6:28
  wait a minute, if if I'm, you know, taking this assessment,
• 6:31
  how is this really getting at how I'm going to respond when
• 6:33
  I'm either too comfortable in a role or even under a lot of
• 6:37
  pressure in a role? And the answer is that it turns
• 6:39
  out that many of the things that we think are our strengths can
• 6:42
  be weaknesses at certain times. That's really the way that
• 6:45
  assessment works is a lot of times people will be telling us
• 6:48
  things like, yes, I can overcome any challenge.
• 6:50
  There's nothing that can stand in my way.
• 6:53
  I'm unstoppable if I just put my mind to it.
• 6:55
  And it turns out that while that can be or that that sort of
• 6:58
  confidence can be a great strength, sometimes that leads
• 7:01
  to overconfidence and we can overdo that thing, can take on
• 7:05
  more than we can really handle. We can feel entitled to good
• 7:09
  results even if those aren't coming our way, even if we
• 7:13
  failed to perform. And that assessment is able to
• 7:16
  pick up on those kinds of things just going too far in that
• 7:20
  direction. That's The funny thing about
• 7:22
  personality, Anthony, is that, and when I first got into to
• 7:25
  studying personality psychology, I found out that the, the, the
• 7:28
  technical term is ego syntonic, right?
• 7:31
  Which basically means we tend to like ourselves.
• 7:34
  So what we tend to think of as our great strengths, we don't
• 7:38
  think of as weaknesses. So sort of surprising, or maybe
• 7:42
  unsurprisingly in some ways, people are willing to sort of
• 7:44
  admit those weaknesses partly because they think that's what's
• 7:48
  their strengths are. They don't actually realize that
• 7:51
  they're raising their hand to point out a weakness.
• 7:54
  They're really pushing hard on what they think is their
• 7:56
  strength. And because of the work that
• 7:59
  you've done to understand the patterns of human personality
• 8:03
  and human behavior, you know that there's a tendency when
• 8:07
  somebody is pushing too hard on this being a strength, that
• 8:11
  there's another side to that same coin.
• 8:13
  Absolutely, yeah. And then you guys also, you do a
• 8:18
  lot of work in helping folks develop their current team.
• 8:22
  It seems like that would be kind of a different set of skills
• 8:25
  than sort of assessing personality like you want.
• 8:28
  Let's sort of assess where you are.
• 8:30
  Now that we know where you are and where you need work now
• 8:33
  we're going to help you. What does this other side of the
• 8:35
  business look like? You guys, yeah, Yeah, that's a
• 8:38
  really good question. I mean, it's it is a challenge
• 8:42
  in some respects because as I just mentioned, personality is
• 8:44
  kind of ego syntonic. So we tend to like ourselves.
• 8:47
  So even if we get feedback that, hey, this might be a weakness
• 8:50
  for you, This might be an area where you want to be on the
• 8:53
  watch out for that many of us tend to go, yeah, but I really
• 8:56
  think that's what makes me great.
• 8:58
  And so I'm going to keep doing that kind of thing.
• 9:01
  This is where, you know, getting that feedback is is sort of a a
• 9:04
  critical start. We're just, we, we find in our
• 9:07
  research that sometimes just giving people awareness of how
• 9:11
  this might cause you to be seen right, This, this may have an
• 9:14
  impact on your reputation. And just getting that awareness
• 9:18
  of how those behaviors might affect your reputation.
• 9:20
  Sometimes is enough for people to go, oh, I do need to watch
• 9:24
  out for that. I better back off in this
• 9:25
  particular situation. Or maybe I need to trust people
• 9:29
  a little bit more. I'm too quick to dismiss other
• 9:32
  people or or to keep people at the distance.
• 9:35
  Sometimes just that awareness is enough, but sometimes that's
• 9:37
  not. Sometimes you need even more
• 9:39
  expertise and advice and that's where coaching really comes into
• 9:42
  play. Now at Hogan, we do some
• 9:44
  coaching, but that's really not our core competency.
• 9:47
  Our core competency really is the personality assessment.
• 9:49
  But we partner with thousands of coaches all over the world who
• 9:53
  have been certified in our assessments.
• 9:55
  They could use our assessments as part of their coaching
• 9:57
  practice. And there are many amazing,
• 10:00
  excellent executive coaches who have dozens, 2030, some even 40
• 10:07
  years of coaching experience under their belts.
• 10:10
  And they can take that experience, combine it with the
• 10:13
  insights that come from our assessments and really create
• 10:16
  custom crafted development plans for individuals to say, hey,
• 10:19
  these are the things we want to work on it.
• 10:21
  Next week. I want you to tell me about what
• 10:23
  steps you took, what are the things you did this week
• 10:25
  behaviorally to try to work on that particular aspect of your
• 10:28
  reputation. And they can really go a long
• 10:30
  ways in the workplace. I mean, we're typically talking
• 10:33
  about working with leaders who are right on that next level of
• 10:37
  getting into the C-Suite. That's a pretty typical sweet
• 10:40
  spot for us. They want to get to that C-Suite
• 10:43
  and they're just, they're just that close.
• 10:45
  The company thinks they're great.
• 10:46
  And that's really a critical thing.
• 10:49
  I think a lot of people think if you get coaching, oh, that must
• 10:51
  mean there's something bad, that there's something wrong.
• 10:53
  Well, first of all, every professional athlete has
• 10:56
  coaching, right? I mean, like, I mean, like
• 10:58
  coaching is about getting better.
• 10:59
  It doesn't matter how good you are.
• 11:00
  They're right. They're obviously all great.
• 11:02
  So that's typically the level that we're working at is people
• 11:05
  who are really great, have been fantastic, been promoted all the
• 11:08
  way up through their careers and are on that next level of
• 11:11
  getting to the C-Suite. And with just the right, the
• 11:14
  right coach, the right rounding out the right strategies, they
• 11:17
  can get themselves to, to where they want to get to in their
• 11:20
  careers. And so, so that's really, and,
• 11:23
  and let me say one other thing about about that sort of
• 11:25
  coaching, Anthony. I think a lot of people think,
• 11:27
  oh, so your goal is to get somebody to change their
• 11:29
  personality, that that's not really our goal.
• 11:31
  In fact, I'm not even sure what that means to change your
• 11:35
  personality. I, you know, there's a number of
• 11:38
  ways we can think about personality and certain
• 11:40
  biological parts of our personality really don't change
• 11:43
  that much anyway. The goal isn't to change your
• 11:46
  personality. The goal is to sort of
• 11:47
  understand the way you typically want to operate and understand
• 11:51
  how that might cause you issues in certain times and when you
• 11:55
  might want to back off on that, when you might want to change
• 11:57
  your tact or change your strategy.
• 12:01
  That's interesting. Do do all of your reports and
• 12:05
  your assessments come from, I'm probably going to use the wrong
• 12:09
  term. I think of it as sort of an
• 12:10
  asynchronous communication. I am taking this assessment,
• 12:15
  this test, I'm sitting down and I'm filling out a bubble sheet.
• 12:18
  You guys are taking that and reviewing that separately or do
• 12:22
  any of the assessments come from like observational things, like
• 12:27
  if there's a salesperson who wants to sort of improve and
• 12:30
  become a sales manager, you might sit in on some of their
• 12:32
  sessions, something like? That, yeah, yeah.
• 12:35
  And I think both of those are really, you know, those are,
• 12:38
  those are good examples of the kinds of assessments that are
• 12:41
  sort of out there. There's actually many methods
• 12:42
  for evaluating talent and those those are two really popular
• 12:45
  ones. The one is sort of the cell,
• 12:46
  what we call self report personality assessment, where
• 12:50
  you know, like you said, bubble sheets.
• 12:52
  That's the classic way of doing it.
• 12:53
  We don't do those anymore. It's all now it's bubbles on the
• 12:56
  Internet or in fact with your phones.
• 12:58
  Now we have a way of doing it where you just click an area on
• 13:01
  the phone. Are you saying I just dated
• 13:02
  myself? Well, no, no, no, no, no.
• 13:04
  I mean, I, I'm certainly very familiar with bubble sheets
• 13:07
  myself, so go ahead. So you know, that method is the
• 13:13
  way that that we use it is that sort of that that sort of a self
• 13:16
  report bubble sheet kind of method.
• 13:17
  Of course, behavioral observation is another method as
• 13:20
  well. When I would say is why?
• 13:23
  And again, I'm sure people would say I'm biased and for for some
• 13:26
  reasons, but I think I'm biased by the data.
• 13:29
  What I find is that if I could spend 15 minutes with you or 30
• 13:33
  minutes with you or 45 minutes with you and to try to get as
• 13:36
  much information as possible, as many insights as I can, that
• 13:39
  that's the most efficient method for getting that.
• 13:41
  And believe me, I've looked, I've looked at all kinds of
• 13:45
  things like let's scrape your social media history.
• 13:48
  Let's look at all kinds of other ways that I can get insights
• 13:50
  about you with your text messaging, the words you use.
• 13:53
  Let's put little cameras on it. We've done that.
• 13:55
  I mean, I've done studies where we put cameras on people to
• 13:57
  watch where they walked and where they went and those kinds
• 13:59
  of things. And, and what we found is that
• 14:01
  the most efficient method for getting the most insight out of
• 14:05
  an individual is to use those those self report techniques.
• 14:09
  Interesting. There's nothing wrong
• 14:11
  necessarily with these sort of behavioral kinds of things.
• 14:13
  And in fact, there are really like you use an example there
• 14:16
  with the sales circumstance where, yes, getting feedback on
• 14:19
  a specific situation, specific encounter can be really valuable
• 14:21
  for individuals. So I'm not trying to dismiss
• 14:24
  those, but in terms of a sort of a broad overview of how you're
• 14:28
  going to tend to behave across many situations that the self
• 14:31
  report personal personality assessment just tends to be the
• 14:34
  most efficient. And, and I, like I said, I know
• 14:37
  some people say, geez, you know, 30 minutes, 45 minutes of test
• 14:40
  taking, that's a long time. It is, but, but it's sort of
• 14:44
  like, but it, but is it worth it?
• 14:46
  That's the question. And it in my view it it really
• 14:48
  is worth it. It and I'm not even sure if this
• 14:51
  is sort of a valid question because I don't, I don't know if
• 14:53
  people are trying to do like do people try to gain the
• 14:56
  assessment like, oh, I know I'm not a really good leader, but
• 15:00
  I'm going to try to give them the answers to, to show that I
• 15:03
  am a good leader because that's the job that I want.
• 15:05
  Yeah, it's another good question.
• 15:07
  And this is one that we do get quite a bit.
• 15:09
  But the way people typically ask is there's an entire topic in in
• 15:13
  academia on faking. It's what's called faking.
• 15:16
  Or do people try to fake? Do they try to say, oh, this
• 15:18
  isn't how I am, really, but this is.
• 15:20
  And there's a couple of parts to that question.
• 15:23
  It gets very confusing very quickly.
• 15:25
  On the one hand, I'm not sure what it means to fake, right?
• 15:31
  You could say, well, it means to say something that you don't
• 15:33
  really feel or you don't really think.
• 15:35
  But here's the thing. Ever since you were really
• 15:38
  little, you've been coached to fake, right?
• 15:42
  You think about an infant. What does an infant does?
• 15:45
  An infant fake? Is an infant being its true self
• 15:47
  or is an infant, you know, trying to impress someone?
• 15:50
  Well, infants, they just do what they do, right?
• 15:53
  But from the moment you're born, there's somebody telling you,
• 15:57
  don't do this, do this, do this, do that, and that happens for
• 16:00
  your entire life. This is entire socialization
• 16:02
  process. So we've all been socialized to
• 16:05
  behave in certain ways. I mean, the example I use all
• 16:08
  the time with people is, well, you know, Anthony, you're
• 16:10
  wearing a shirt here today. And why did you decide to do
• 16:13
  that? I mean, are you trying to make
• 16:14
  some sort of impression on people by wearing clothes?
• 16:17
  I mean, what? You know, why?
• 16:18
  Why didn't you just be your true self, Anthony?
• 16:21
  Trying not to get people sick while they're eating their
• 16:23
  lunch. Yeah.
• 16:25
  So I mean, the the point is that we're always doing little things
• 16:28
  to manage our impression. In fact, that happens when
• 16:30
  people take personality assessments.
• 16:31
  That happens when people go on job interviews.
• 16:33
  That happens when people create resumes, right.
• 16:36
  So we're always trying to create some kind of impression.
• 16:39
  What we found with our research is that the impressions when,
• 16:43
  when people take our assessments, we don't think,
• 16:46
  it's not like a blood test. We're not measuring some true
• 16:48
  personality inside you. What we're measuring is the
• 16:51
  impression you're trying to make, right?
• 16:54
  So what's the impression? What are you trying to tell us
• 16:56
  about yourself? And what we do with our
• 16:58
  assessments is we link that to other data.
• 17:01
  So we link that to performance on the job, We link that to
• 17:03
  reputation on the job. And we say people who try to do
• 17:07
  the things you're telling us that you do, this is how they're
• 17:11
  seen, this is how they tend to perform on the job.
• 17:14
  So in many respects, you could say, well, you know, do people
• 17:17
  try to gain the system or do they?
• 17:18
  Well, I think they do. I think people try to do that
• 17:21
  just in the same way you would do that on a job interview, just
• 17:23
  in the same way you would do that on a resume.
• 17:26
  You're going to try to make it look as good as possible.
• 17:28
  But our assessments are designed with that in mind.
• 17:30
  They're designed thinking that people are trying to, to put
• 17:34
  forward the the best impression that they can.
• 17:36
  So it's not about trying to to catch people who are faking or
• 17:39
  anything like that. I will say that we have a few
• 17:43
  examples of people who this was run really nice study.
• 17:47
  I think it's OK to say at this point, it's about 20 years old
• 17:50
  now. After 911, we had a contract
• 17:55
  with the US government to hire all the TSA employees.
• 18:00
  And so all of these employees who were going to hire had to
• 18:02
  take our assessments. And, you know, thousands and
• 18:05
  thousands of people across the US taking our assessments.
• 18:09
  By the way, we don't have that contract anymore, and we haven't
• 18:11
  for a long time. So if you're wondering about
• 18:13
  today's TSA employees, don't ask.
• 18:15
  If you are now upset with the TSA agents, don't blame Hogan
• 18:19
  Assessments. But the federal government
• 18:23
  requires that if someone doesn't get a job, you have to tell them
• 18:25
  why they didn't get the job, and they were allowed to reapply for
• 18:28
  that job six months later. So in this particular study, we
• 18:31
  had about 5000 people who were denied employment for for the
• 18:35
  TSA job. They were denied specifically
• 18:38
  because they didn't meet the profile for that job on our
• 18:41
  assessments. And they were allowed to take it
• 18:43
  again six months later. These 5000 people did.
• 18:46
  Now, if there was ever anybody motivated, I mean, they were
• 18:49
  told specifically you didn't get the job because of your scores
• 18:53
  on this assessment. If there was ever anybody
• 18:55
  motivated to try to, to, to, you know, to fake to get a different
• 18:58
  score, what we found was that about 5% of those people got
• 19:02
  different scores. 2 1/2 percent were a better fit for the job, 2
• 19:06
  1/2 percent were a worse fit for the job.
• 19:10
  So it doesn't really seem like there's a lot of, you know, the
• 19:14
  impression. 95% pretty much scored the same, which is.
• 19:16
  Pretty much the same thing, Pretty much the same fit.
• 19:19
  So, you know, so this this question of faking, and there's
• 19:22
  a huge academic literature on it.
• 19:24
  It's very, you know, the question is this, if you give
• 19:26
  somebody a personality test and then you say, OK, now take it
• 19:29
  again, but pretend like you're somebody else, people can get
• 19:32
  different scores. That's absolutely the case.
• 19:34
  I mean, I mean, if I tell people all the time, if you want to get
• 19:36
  different scores on a personality test, it's easy.
• 19:38
  Just write, just mark different answers, you'll get a different
• 19:41
  score. But what's the goal again?
• 19:44
  That's what I mean when I say it's not a blood test.
• 19:45
  Like if I want to get a different score on a blood test,
• 19:47
  I can't just, you know, think of my way to a different score on a
• 19:51
  blood test. What sets you and Hogan
• 19:55
  assessments apart from other types of assessments out there?
• 19:59
  Well, I think what people would say, and I think it's true is,
• 20:03
  is that we're grounded in science.
• 20:05
  So the founders of our company, doctors Robert and Joyce Hogan,
• 20:10
  we're both academics. Robert Hogan is one of the most
• 20:13
  famous personality psychologist of all time.
• 20:18
  He's still alive by the way. He's 87 years old I think now
• 20:24
  and so and we're still chat every week, but everything
• 20:29
  behind our assessments starts with science.
• 20:31
  It starts with science at the core.
• 20:32
  I'm I'm a lucky guy. I have a big research team of
• 20:36
  PhDs and masters IO psychologist, personality
• 20:40
  psychologist, quantitative psychologist who work on my team
• 20:45
  and and make sure our science is the latest, the best science we
• 20:48
  can offer on in any day. We make updates to our
• 20:52
  assessments. We make updates to our norms
• 20:54
  constantly at no real value to us.
• 20:57
  Like none of our clients say, jeez, Hogan, we would use you if
• 21:01
  you would update your norms or Jeez, Hogan, we would use you if
• 21:03
  you're like, we just do it because we know it's better.
• 21:06
  Like we just know that it improves our assessments.
• 21:09
  It's going to make them better. And so even though it doesn't
• 21:12
  make us any money, we're just that's just what we're committed
• 21:15
  to. We are committed to making sure
• 21:18
  that whatever we're offering is backed by the best in science
• 21:21
  can offer. And what do we mean by that?
• 21:23
  Mostly we mean validity. Mostly we mean predicting the
• 21:26
  outcomes that we say we can predict.
• 21:28
  We mean that when a, when our assessment or a report tells you
• 21:32
  that this is how others are going to see you, that that's
• 21:34
  actually true, that it's not just sort of close to true or
• 21:38
  kind of true or not even true at all, which, you know, quite
• 21:42
  frankly, Anthony, anybody can make a personality assessment
• 21:45
  and sell it. There's no regulating body for
• 21:47
  personality assessments in in the US.
• 21:51
  And so, you know, we stake our reputation on, on, on the fact
• 21:54
  that what we say is accurate and true.
• 21:57
  And I think that's what that's what really sets us apart.
• 22:00
  So what's the profile of a typical customer and, and what's
• 22:05
  the profile of the position that they traditionally come to you
• 22:09
  for? Like, I could see it being like
• 22:11
  your customer profile being sort of like a combination of
• 22:14
  directly the companies themselves as well as maybe like
• 22:17
  like recruiters, executive recruiters or, you know,
• 22:21
  staffing companies. And I would think that I'm sure
• 22:25
  that the assessments, you know, they're obviously they're not
• 22:27
  free and you're, you know, giving them to multiple people,
• 22:31
  probably more like executive level positions that people are
• 22:34
  coming to you for. Yeah.
• 22:36
  So, you know, we got our foundations actually and
• 22:39
  completely in the selection side of the Business Today.
• 22:42
  We're probably about 60% development, 40% selection.
• 22:46
  What does that mean? 60% development.
• 22:49
  Yes, it's about 60% of the people who take our assessments
• 22:51
  are taking it for some sort of development.
• 22:53
  Like, OK, I want to get feedback like I'm already in a role
• 22:56
  that's considering me for another role, but it's not, it's
• 22:59
  not a selection profile. So they're not saying if you fit
• 23:01
  this or fit that, you're going to get it or not.
• 23:03
  It's just here we want to give you some feedback, some
• 23:06
  awareness so that you can try to improve in whatever ways those
• 23:09
  might be. Whereas in the selection role,
• 23:11
  we typically are giving the this person's a high fit, this
• 23:14
  person's a moderate fit, this person's a low fit kind of
• 23:16
  information. But our origination was, was
• 23:21
  actually truck drivers. We originally started by going
• 23:24
  to trucking companies and saying, hey, we can help you
• 23:27
  reduce accidents. And we've got a bunch of data on
• 23:29
  this, by the way, safety is a hugely important issue in many,
• 23:33
  many industries. But we started with truck
• 23:36
  drivers and saying, hey, we can help you reduce accidents.
• 23:39
  It turns out for most trucking companies, if they have an
• 23:41
  accident, they cost them anywhere between 1 to $2,000,000
• 23:46
  just to deal with the done, you know that all of the issues that
• 23:50
  come up with an accident. So paying $34 or $45.00 for a
• 23:55
  personality assessment is that turns out to be a really huge
• 23:58
  savings for them. And what are you looking for in
• 24:01
  that particular case you're looking for like impulsivity or
• 24:04
  I don't know, Yeah. So those are the kinds of
• 24:06
  things. Yeah, exactly.
• 24:07
  Right. So we look for people who are
• 24:08
  impulsive, people who are going to follow the rules that, you
• 24:11
  know, a lot of the safety rules are for safety reasons, right.
• 24:14
  So people who are much more likely to follow those kinds of
• 24:16
  things, people who are going to be stay alert, not get bored
• 24:20
  easily, particularly if they're doing long haul truck driving,
• 24:23
  right. So people who are easily bored
• 24:25
  and aren't so great and then that kind of role as well.
• 24:30
  So, so, so those kinds of things.
• 24:32
  So, but yeah, the typical customer these days is, well, we
• 24:38
  work with about 75% of the Fortune 500 that's in the US, of
• 24:43
  course. And then around the globe, we
• 24:44
  work with many multinational companies.
• 24:46
  I mean, pretty much every company you've heard of as at
• 24:50
  some point come to work with us, which is pretty remarkable given
• 24:54
  our, our, you know, originations, but they typically
• 24:59
  come to us with, with some talent problem, right.
• 25:02
  So one talent problem maybe we're we're trying to identify
• 25:04
  our high potentials for this particular role.
• 25:07
  I gave us some examples about safety.
• 25:09
  You know, we're concerned about safety on these oil drilling
• 25:12
  platforms and we want to make sure that we've got the right
• 25:14
  people in the right roles for that.
• 25:17
  A lot of airline pilots, again, same kind of thing and looking
• 25:20
  for people who could be safe and, and ensure that, you know,
• 25:23
  the planes land. And then lots of it is on that
• 25:28
  leadership development side. So we've got, you know, it could
• 25:31
  be any company in the world where they have executives in
• 25:33
  their their corporate offices and they're trying to identify
• 25:35
  that next step up for executives.
• 25:38
  And we help them either on the identification side or we help
• 25:41
  them around the development side for the, for those individuals.
• 25:45
  So that's pretty typical. We don't do any business sort of
• 25:49
  like, like if you're, if you're listening to podcast and you
• 25:51
  say, oh, I'd really like to take a Hogan assessment and learn
• 25:53
  more about myself, We don't really do that.
• 25:56
  We really only work B to B to B. So, you know, but if you're in a
• 26:00
  company where, where that's a thing that you would do, there's
• 26:04
  probably someone in your HR staff who can certainly connect
• 26:09
  with our folks at Hogan to, to, you know, we, we offer
• 26:13
  certification for people who, so many of the clients that we work
• 26:17
  with have certified individuals inside their organization.
• 26:21
  So, so they actually handle all of the assessment.
• 26:24
  They go deliver the results to their teams and their staff
• 26:27
  inside. They maybe even run team
• 26:29
  sessions for entire groups of teams.
• 26:31
  They do that all internally and they just use us to help provide
• 26:34
  them with the assessments. OK, interesting.
• 26:39
  You know we mentioned in the intro diversity, inclusion are
• 26:43
  important things at Hogan. How do you help organizations
• 26:49
  kind of address diversity and inclusion challenges kind of
• 26:53
  beyond the usual check the box initiatives?
• 26:57
  Yeah, yeah. So one of the when, when Hogan
• 27:02
  Assessments was founded, right when, when Joyce and Robert
• 27:06
  really got started with this business, it was coming off of
• 27:09
  the the Civil Rights Act. And there were a number of
• 27:16
  organizations saying, OK, well, how, how can we identify, how
• 27:20
  can we hire individuals in a fairway in a way that doesn't
• 27:23
  violate the Civil Rights Act? And some of those organizations
• 27:29
  were using IQ tests. IQ tests notoriously have racial
• 27:35
  differences, right? That some racist score
• 27:38
  differently than others on IQ tests.
• 27:40
  And So what you end up with is a situation where you you, you're
• 27:45
  have a sort of an unfair, a sort of a bias in your hiring.
• 27:49
  Now, people can debate about whether or not the IQ tests are
• 27:52
  valid. I'm not going to talk about that
• 27:53
  here today. But what I will say is that from
• 27:56
  personality assessments, there are no racial differences.
• 27:59
  There are no gender differences in personality assessment.
• 28:02
  So we find that men and women get about the same scores.
• 28:04
  Every race gets about the same scores.
• 28:06
  I mean, there are tiny differences, but these are when
• 28:08
  we're talking about differences, we're talking about non
• 28:11
  meaningful, not like any two groups.
• 28:13
  You give me any two groups in the world, you know, and, and we
• 28:17
  measure them on any metric and there's always going to be some
• 28:20
  difference, right? At some, you know, to the 3rd,
• 28:23
  4th, 5th decimal point, there's always going to be some
• 28:25
  difference. So there, there are differences,
• 28:27
  but these differences aren't practically meaningful when it
• 28:29
  comes to making things like personnel decisions.
• 28:31
  So what happens is when people use our assessments for making
• 28:34
  personnel decisions, it sort of levels the playing field from a
• 28:38
  racial standpoint or from a from a gender standpoint, because or
• 28:42
  age the same thing we because you don't know, right?
• 28:47
  It could be, it could be. I mean, I've actually done these
• 28:50
  kinds of things. I've tried to do analysis to say
• 28:52
  just how good can I predict someone's race from our
• 28:54
  assessments? The answer is not very well
• 28:56
  interesting, which is great. From my perspective.
• 28:59
  It's it's. But you you feel like you could
• 29:01
  from an IQ test. Yeah, you, you can, you can
• 29:04
  predict them from IQ test fairly well.
• 29:06
  Yeah, yeah. And so, so that's the beauty of
• 29:09
  these tests as they sort of level the playing field.
• 29:11
  They say, hey, if this person is a good fit for the profile, if
• 29:13
  they have the right skills. And in fact, that's what Robert
• 29:16
  and Joyce Hogan were trying to do.
• 29:17
  They were trying to level the playing field.
• 29:19
  So here's a way that you can evaluate candidates for a job
• 29:22
  that's unbiased. And what other method has that?
• 29:26
  I mean, I don't think we're ever going to get rid of interviews
• 29:29
  as a method for hiring individuals, but interviews have
• 29:32
  inherent potential for bias. I'm not saying that interviews
• 29:35
  are inherently biased, but they have inherent potential for
• 29:37
  bias. You can tell you know someone's
• 29:40
  typically you can tell someone's ethnicity, you can tell their
• 29:42
  age, you can tell their gender. Typically you could tell those
• 29:45
  kinds of things from from an interview that you you can't
• 29:48
  with a personality assessment. And So what we advise clients to
• 29:52
  do is evaluate your candidates with a personality assessment
• 29:54
  first so that you can get a nice base of individuals and then of
• 29:58
  course, use the other kinds of assessments you wanted to along
• 30:01
  the way. But it's a way of not excluding
• 30:05
  people that you that might have historically been excluded for
• 30:08
  other reasons for. And again, I'm not trying to say
• 30:11
  there's malicious intent on the part of some of these employers.
• 30:14
  In some cases. There's a lot of research on
• 30:16
  this as well. We know that the people have
• 30:18
  these implicit biases. They don't even know that
• 30:20
  they're biased in a certain way. I'm biased against people who
• 30:23
  have a certain college degree or certain background.
• 30:26
  The personality assessments sort of level that playing field and
• 30:29
  they create a way for for organization.
• 30:32
  And in fact, I've told organizations this before.
• 30:34
  If you use personality assessments to make your, your
• 30:37
  hiring promoting decisions, if that's all you used, I'm not
• 30:41
  saying you should, but if that's all you used, you would not have
• 30:45
  adverse impact problems. You wouldn't have diversity
• 30:48
  issues. That's interesting.
• 30:52
  Do you see anybody do it that way where they're only using the
• 30:54
  personality? Because I guess in order for
• 30:56
  that to be effective, it would have to be like the results
• 30:59
  would have to be blind, right? Like you're not attaching them
• 31:02
  to like a person's file. That's right.
• 31:05
  Yeah. So I mean, look, the reality is
• 31:07
  people are always going to use other.
• 31:08
  I mean, there's other information that's relevant for
• 31:10
  the job. Personality assistance aren't
• 31:11
  the only piece of information that's relevant.
• 31:14
  You're going to want to know the person's background and
• 31:15
  experiences. Are they qualified for the job?
• 31:18
  And sort of sort of they have the core competencies to to do
• 31:21
  the job well. So I think it's sort of an
• 31:23
  impossible world to think, but from our perspective, it helps
• 31:26
  level the playing field, helps create more equal environment.
• 31:31
  Ryan, can you share a moment from your early days as Chief
• 31:34
  Science Officer that maybe highlights Hogan's commitment to
• 31:38
  innovation and data-driven decision making?
• 31:43
  For sure. Yeah.
• 31:44
  Look, when I, when I first got to Hogan, well, I will say this,
• 31:51
  you know my team, most people like our team and get along with
• 31:55
  our team. But our team sometimes pushes
• 31:57
  for things that our data science team pushes for things that the
• 32:01
  rest of the business might not like.
• 32:04
  You know, we push for updates on things.
• 32:06
  So one of the first things we pushed for was changing the way
• 32:09
  our assessment data are collected.
• 32:12
  So for many, many years, the Hogan's assessments were
• 32:15
  collected on a true false format.
• 32:17
  So either marked true or false to every item.
• 32:20
  We pushed really hard to move from a true false format to a
• 32:23
  one to four sort of rating format, or strongly disagree,
• 32:27
  disagree, agree, strongly agree rating format.
• 32:31
  So now there's four options instead of two.
• 32:34
  And there was a lot of pushback. I mean, there was the IT
• 32:37
  challenges. I mean, it sounds easy, right?
• 32:39
  Oh, but you just change the assessment, no problem.
• 32:41
  But the IT challenges on this are immense.
• 32:45
  You have to translate all of that into 40 languages.
• 32:50
  You have to be able to explain the instructions and everything
• 32:53
  else to all these people are all around the world.
• 32:56
  You have to impact current clients who are using it.
• 32:59
  You have to build a new norm, and we take a tremendous amount
• 33:03
  of pride in our global norm. We have the most representative
• 33:07
  global norm of the global working population ever created
• 33:11
  from a personality standpoint. Well, what it means is we have
• 33:17
  people in our database, you mentioned earlier, 11 million
• 33:19
  people. We've got, we have data from so
• 33:22
  many people in so many different jobs around so many different
• 33:26
  countries who speak so many different languages at different
• 33:29
  job levels all over the world that we can actually stratify
• 33:34
  this data to create a norm or to create a sample that represents
• 33:41
  the global working population. And so when you get scores on
• 33:45
  our assessments, you don't just, we don't just tell you, wow, you
• 33:47
  scored 7 out of 12 on this on this scale.
• 33:51
  We tell you where you fell in terms of a percentile relative
• 33:54
  to the global working population, because we have such
• 33:57
  an incredible sample of, of workers or from around the world
• 34:02
  who've taken our assessments. And so the, the challenge
• 34:06
  though, though Anthony was, we said this, we know this is a
• 34:11
  better way. We know we can get better data.
• 34:14
  We know we can provide more clear insights if we go to this
• 34:17
  four point measurement response. And, and the reason it was true
• 34:20
  false by the way, was because as we talked about earlier, we
• 34:23
  talked about bubbles, turns out when you're programming stuff on
• 34:27
  old computer systems, the true false way of scoring was way,
• 34:30
  way easier, way less complicated.
• 34:33
  So lots of the classic test and personality assessment were
• 34:37
  true, false, because it would just was a way simpler way of,
• 34:40
  of measuring things. But we knew in the sort of, you
• 34:43
  know, the modern era that we needed to go to four point and,
• 34:45
  and again, there was a lot of pushback, you know, you know,
• 34:49
  well, what will clients think? Well, they think that the
• 34:52
  previous results were invalid because now the norms change and
• 34:56
  because we have to change the norms and because, you know,
• 34:58
  they might get a slightly different score this time than
• 35:00
  they got last time, or they're going to think of this as
• 35:02
  there's lots of concerns about those kinds of things.
• 35:05
  But at the end of the day, we knew it was the right thing to
• 35:09
  do. We knew this was a better way of
• 35:11
  getting those insights, delivering more accurate
• 35:13
  insights. And, you know, we ultimately,
• 35:17
  we, we pushed this through, even though through it was a
• 35:19
  tremendous amount of work to do. And, and many, many people had
• 35:23
  to put in lots and lots of hours, including our, our, our
• 35:25
  TS, our IT team had to put in a tremendous amount of work to
• 35:29
  make all this happen. But every now and then I get a,
• 35:35
  a case back where somebody say, you know, I took these
• 35:37
  assessments when I was on two point and now I took them again
• 35:39
  on, on our four point scoring. And you know, they, they, they
• 35:44
  mean so much more to me now. I've gotten so much more.
• 35:46
  I've picked up these little extra nuances.
• 35:48
  There's all this little extra information that you can get now
• 35:50
  that you couldn't get before. And that really makes me smile
• 35:54
  that, that that makes me feel really good about the work we do
• 35:56
  because I know, again, I don't think it made us a dollar.
• 36:00
  I don't think there was a single customer or single person out
• 36:02
  there that was like, oh, Hogan's going to four point now we
• 36:04
  really want to use Hogan. I I just don't think that's
• 36:07
  true. But we just knew scientifically
• 36:09
  it was the right thing to do. And, and it was absolutely a
• 36:12
  challenge, but, but I think it was was worth fighting for.
• 36:16
  So let me extrapolate that out and see if there's any validity
• 36:19
  to this. So you went from 2 point to four
• 36:21
  point, right? Strongly agree, agree, disagree,
• 36:23
  strongly disagree. Is there any argument to be made
• 36:27
  to go into like a 10 point scale where it's like, where do you
• 36:30
  fall on this spectrum? Or does that like does it get to
• 36:34
  a point where you're you're kind of asking to get into a level of
• 36:37
  minutia that's really sort of hard for somebody to quantify in
• 36:40
  their head? Yeah, yeah.
• 36:42
  That that, that's right. It's a good question because
• 36:44
  that that's exactly, you know, in fact, there's entire, there's
• 36:47
  entire academic literature dedicated to the study of should
• 36:51
  it be 3 points or four or five or seven or nine or right.
• 36:54
  And there's actually people who've done, and some people use
• 36:56
  100 point scales and there's all kinds of different.
• 36:59
  Yeah. And and it turns out that most
• 37:02
  of the it's. Gonna be like a point of
• 37:03
  diminishing returns, right? Exactly.
• 37:05
  Most of the research suggests that anything above 7 is
• 37:10
  absolutely, to use a technical word, nonsense.
• 37:16
  Like, basically, people can't tell.
• 37:18
  Can you tell the difference between somebody who's a 95 out
• 37:20
  of 194 out of 100? I don't, right?
• 37:24
  I can't. And it's the same thing.
• 37:25
  Even if you go down to 910127 seems to be, there seems to be a
• 37:29
  little bit maybe hints of return, but most of the return
• 37:32
  you get is somewhere between 4:00 and 5:00.
• 37:33
  That's what the research suggests that four and five is
• 37:36
  really optimal for the for the most bang for your buck return.
• 37:39
  It's also a little bit more taxing to do if you go to if you
• 37:42
  go to 79, right? It's just a little bit harder
• 37:45
  for the Raider because now they're using a little bit more
• 37:47
  space. If you can, if you're thinking
• 37:49
  about your mouse and moving your mouse across the screen.
• 37:51
  I will also say one of the cool things about four point is that
• 37:55
  our phones are nicely in in boxes, right?
• 37:58
  So we have nice. So it's really easy to mark one
• 38:01
  of four boxes on our the. UI it's important, yeah.
• 38:04
  Exactly. So you mentioned that you've got
• 38:07
  this norm for 11 million people who have taken your assessments
• 38:09
  over many, many years. What kind of interesting or
• 38:13
  surprising things have you guys been able to learn from that
• 38:17
  huge collection of data? Well, so some of the most
• 38:21
  interesting things, I think are when you look at cross cultural
• 38:24
  kinds of things. So you say, OK, well, how does
• 38:26
  this culture compared to that culture or this country or that
• 38:29
  country? And one of the things that comes
• 38:31
  out is that you actually just don't see that many differences
• 38:34
  that people are kind of people wherever you go around the
• 38:38
  world. At the same time, there are some
• 38:41
  and some of those differences are, are are quite interesting.
• 38:45
  For example, we know that in in Japan specifically, leaders tend
• 38:50
  to score quite a bit lower on ambition than in other parts of
• 38:54
  the world. And that's also true inside
• 38:56
  Asia. Some people say, oh, that's
• 38:58
  Asia, That's an Asian thing. It's not, it's it's really
• 39:00
  specific to Japan, Japan and Japanese leader leaders and
• 39:04
  specific to that kind of culture.
• 39:05
  There's much more of a self effacing kind of culture there
• 39:09
  where people are not, they're they're not supposed to, to, to
• 39:13
  sort of self present. They're not supposed to present
• 39:16
  themselves as as being, you know, more motivated, more
• 39:19
  hardworking than that than others.
• 39:22
  That that being seen as ambitious is, is sometimes seen
• 39:25
  as a problem in Japan. So there are those kinds of
• 39:28
  things you and at the same time you learn really interesting
• 39:31
  things because you might say, well, like I said, all this is
• 39:34
  an Asia thing, but now we don't see that in China.
• 39:36
  We see people are actually score higher than average the global
• 39:39
  population on ambition, not much, but a little bit higher
• 39:42
  than the global population. So, so these kinds of
• 39:45
  differences I think are really remarkable and they have
• 39:49
  implications for doing business in those cultures, doing
• 39:52
  businesses in different client climates.
• 39:56
  And, and I think so some of those are, those are the kinds
• 39:58
  of insights we found. But I, I mean, we have, I, I, I,
• 40:03
  I hate to put it this way, but we have.
• 40:06
  Hundreds of studies lying around our archive that I wish were
• 40:09
  publicly available information not, and they're not private
• 40:12
  because we want them to be private.
• 40:14
  We just only have so much time. There's only so much time that
• 40:17
  we have to disseminate the information, the knowledge that
• 40:19
  we have. But we just have so many amazing
• 40:22
  studies that have been done by our staff inside that are just
• 40:28
  full of insight. I feel like we could hire an
• 40:31
  academic to come just publish published, published research
• 40:35
  from inside our house for years because there's so much
• 40:40
  knowledge there. Is there any thought or any
• 40:42
  movement to take all these data sets and feed them into some
• 40:47
  sort of an internal large language model into an AI?
• 40:51
  In fact, that's a, that's a really good question.
• 40:53
  In fact, that's actually something we did last year.
• 40:55
  We have a tool that we call that that my team built.
• 40:58
  We call it Hogan Brain because yeah, So what happens is clients
• 41:04
  come to us with questions. They come to us with questions
• 41:06
  about what does this report mean?
• 41:07
  How do I understand this? How can I interpret this?
• 41:09
  I saw a set of scores like this. What how how should I handle
• 41:12
  this with a client? And we've in many cases answered
• 41:16
  those questions through many FAQs, many internal white papers
• 41:20
  and documents, policies, technical papers.
• 41:23
  And in fact, somebody, it wasn't me, but somebody on our team
• 41:28
  decided it was really good idea to archive all of our emails to
• 41:33
  those questions. So when somebody would ask us a
• 41:35
  question and some of us would write an e-mail back answering
• 41:38
  that question, somebody archived all of those emails.
• 41:41
  We have this entire knowledge base of those things.
• 41:44
  And we've had this available for a while.
• 41:46
  But the problem is it's hard to search.
• 41:48
  It's hard to find the thing you're looking for in there.
• 41:51
  But with Hogan Brain, we fed it all of that knowledge and it's
• 41:55
  an AI tool. And now all you have to do is
• 41:57
  ask your question to Hogan Brain.
• 41:59
  And Hogan Brain provides you with an answer to your question
• 42:02
  based on this huge archive of technical reports, technical
• 42:05
  manuals, white papers, knowledge base, e-mail responses.
• 42:11
  And the really cool thing to me, Anthony is, is the guy who we
• 42:14
  had to work on this also made it so that not only does it answer
• 42:17
  your question, it gives you the source that it got the answer
• 42:20
  from. So you can click your one click
• 42:22
  away from going to the source of that document, finding that
• 42:25
  thing where you where you got the answer.
• 42:26
  So to me, it's a really, really powerful tool.
• 42:29
  And I feel like pretty much every organization has these
• 42:33
  kinds of problems where you have, you know, huge numbers of
• 42:35
  policies and procedures that Jesus, hard to keep track of all
• 42:38
  this stuff where you could have a tool like that inside.
• 42:42
  So yeah, that that's a really good question, a really good
• 42:44
  insight. But yeah, we just, we just
• 42:46
  launched that internally just this last year.
• 42:49
  Does that data set also include results from the 11,000,000
• 42:54
  assessments that have been taken over the years?
• 42:56
  So it does not include those results, but it includes kind of
• 42:59
  summaries and white papers. So like for example, our norm
• 43:02
  documentation is included. So the, so the document that
• 43:05
  built that norm where we sort of you know where we said, yeah,
• 43:09
  this is the norm and this is how we built it.
• 43:11
  So that document is included in there.
• 43:13
  But those individual assessment results know those are stored in
• 43:16
  a in a separate database. Is there like a privacy concern
• 43:20
  that the AI may, you know, reveal some like, Oh yeah, John
• 43:25
  Smith? This is what he said.
• 43:27
  And you know, here's the I'll use John Smith as an example.
• 43:31
  Yeah, it's not so much a, a, a privacy concern, although that,
• 43:35
  that is something that we take very seriously at Hogan.
• 43:37
  And we don't, you know, we don't share individual responses or
• 43:40
  anything like that. That's all.
• 43:41
  When we analyse data on my team, we do it anonymously because we
• 43:45
  don't want to have any of that kind of thing.
• 43:46
  We got like lots of, again, lots of really high profile
• 43:51
  individuals come to us to take our assessments for, for serious
• 43:54
  work. And so, you know, we don't sell
• 43:56
  that data. We, we only work directly with
• 43:59
  the client. That's who gets the data and
• 44:01
  that's it. But it's more because the Hogan
• 44:05
  Brain really works on text information a lot better.
• 44:08
  Like there isn't a lot of information for it to glean out
• 44:10
  of the numbers information. And like again, in many cases,
• 44:14
  we've taken that numerical information and we've done stuff
• 44:17
  with that and turned it into reports.
• 44:19
  And that's really what what the Hogan brain works off of is, is
• 44:22
  that that the text information. And the reason I asked Ryan is
• 44:25
  because I don't know. It seems to me that you know,
• 44:30
  you guys said you've, you know, you've assessed the results from
• 44:33
  these 11 million in different assessments over the years.
• 44:36
  And by and large, with some exceptions like you mentioned
• 44:39
  with the the Japanese exception, by and large people are, are the
• 44:43
  same, you know, regardless of you know, where they live in the
• 44:46
  world, race, gender, etcetera. It occurs to me that it is
• 44:50
  probably hard for the human brain and all of the data
• 44:54
  analytical tools that you have to maybe spot some of the
• 44:59
  different nuances which might exist that you haven't picked up
• 45:03
  on. Is there a possibility that
• 45:06
  having Hogan Brain be able to access all that data would
• 45:10
  surface something interesting or useful?
• 45:13
  Yeah, that that is possible in terms of sort of pulling out
• 45:17
  some kind of insights from that data.
• 45:19
  I think one way that we have used AI and this is a little
• 45:23
  different tool, we don't call this one Hogan Brain, we call
• 45:25
  this one the Hogan AI Assistant is to actually aid in
• 45:28
  interpretation. So one thing that happens with
• 45:30
  our assessments is when you take our three core assessments, you
• 45:34
  get scores on 28 scales and over 100 subscales.
• 45:39
  That could be difficult, you know, for somebody, especially
• 45:42
  if you're new to our assessments to even if you've been
• 45:45
  certified. But if you're just newly
• 45:47
  certified to really go, oh, what's the story here?
• 45:49
  What are the key drivers for this person?
• 45:51
  What are the key issues that this person might face in the
• 45:53
  workplace? We have built another little
• 45:57
  tool that actually can take all that information and it does
• 46:00
  kind of what you were suggesting is it actually interprets that
• 46:02
  information, tries to identify. These are the key patterns,
• 46:05
  These are the key things to look out for.
• 46:07
  And that tool is trained on lots of our interpretation
• 46:10
  documentation. It's trained on coaching
• 46:13
  interpretations, things like that, and uses that information
• 46:16
  to say, ah, this is what you know, these might be the key
• 46:19
  strengths in this individual to have.
• 46:21
  These might be some key weaknesses.
• 46:23
  This might be, in fact, you can actually combine it with job
• 46:25
  descriptions, which is pretty cool.
• 46:27
  So you can say how might they be fit for this role and what way,
• 46:30
  what things might they need to work on to be a better fit for
• 46:32
  the role? Pretty cool, yeah.
• 46:37
  So I'm kind of curious, Brian, as the Chief science officer
• 46:41
  there at Hogan, what does that mean exactly?
• 46:45
  Are you kind of overseeing like a team of quants and, you know,
• 46:49
  data analytic people? Are you kind of paint a picture
• 46:52
  of what that role is? Yeah, well, I'll say a couple
• 46:56
  things. First of all, I didn't, I didn't
• 46:57
  come up with the title. Somebody else said this is the
• 46:59
  title, so here you go. So I think it's obnoxious title,
• 47:03
  but. Just being modest, like you
• 47:06
  don't like being the chief of something, but that show up in
• 47:09
  your personality assessment maybe.
• 47:10
  Modesty. Yeah, I don't know.
• 47:12
  I don't know. But I definitely was not the
• 47:15
  title I I picked, but it's OK. I, yeah.
• 47:20
  So I've got about 12 PhD or Masters level, you know, people
• 47:26
  with PhDs or masters who, who, who work on, on my team, they're
• 47:29
  divided up into several teams. So one of our teams does all of
• 47:34
  the, the core stuff on our assessments.
• 47:36
  So that means updating our assessments, updating our
• 47:38
  assessment items to make sure the items are still culturally
• 47:40
  relevant, all the translation work on our items, which by the
• 47:43
  way is a massive process and it's incredibly challenging to
• 47:47
  make sure that the translation that the items that we use in
• 47:49
  one language work in another language.
• 47:50
  We actually just won an award for that last year for, for the
• 47:54
  work that that my my team did on that.
• 47:57
  Just making sure that the word choice is the correct one.
• 48:00
  Like like that kind. Of yeah.
• 48:01
  And you can't, you can't just literally translate an item from
• 48:05
  one language to another. It has to mean the same thing in
• 48:08
  another language. So sometimes literal
• 48:10
  translations don't get it you need.
• 48:12
  And so we work with local psychologists in those in those
• 48:16
  countries or, or local experts in that language to help us
• 48:19
  build better. And then of course, we collect
• 48:21
  lots of data to make sure that the items are actually working
• 48:23
  the same way psychometrically. So we have one team that that's
• 48:27
  focused on that. We have a team who works on
• 48:29
  custom solutions for our clients.
• 48:31
  So sometimes clients come to us with a their own competency
• 48:34
  model. They say, well, this is what it
• 48:35
  takes to be successful in our organization.
• 48:36
  And we can take those competencies, translate those
• 48:39
  into our terms, translate those into our scales and our
• 48:42
  assessments and give them back scores in their terms to say,
• 48:46
  OK, this is what you're looking for.
• 48:47
  This is what this is how this person's going to look on in
• 48:50
  terms of your competencies. We have another team who's who's
• 48:54
  dedicated solely to archiving all of the knowledge and all the
• 48:58
  research that we have, building dashboards so that we have
• 49:01
  access to these kind of information to have to have
• 49:04
  benchmarks. Some people come to us and say,
• 49:06
  do you know anything about C-Suite individuals working in
• 49:10
  the gas and oil industry? Well, yeah, we do.
• 49:13
  We have a fairly large, but we have dashboards now that we can
• 49:16
  access that really quickly. And then we have another branch
• 49:20
  that's dedicated solely to research.
• 49:21
  So we have like, and by research, I mean a research for
• 49:25
  the good of personality science. So we have many people who want
• 49:28
  to collaborate with us to come in to get access to our data.
• 49:31
  So we have a branch that's dedicated to working with those
• 49:33
  collaborators. Many of these are academics who
• 49:35
  work at, you know, different academic institutions.
• 49:38
  We've, I don't know how many pH DS have people have done their
• 49:42
  dissertations using, using data at, at Hogan.
• 49:46
  And so we have a branch that's dedicated that.
• 49:47
  So and then we have about at any given time another 10 or 12
• 49:52
  interns who come and work with us as well.
• 49:54
  These are typically PhD students, but sometimes masters
• 49:58
  students as well from all over the US who, who come to work as
• 50:02
  interns for us and get training in this kind of work.
• 50:05
  And often, quite frankly, the interns bring their own skill
• 50:10
  set and knowledge and help us innovate and create for, for the
• 50:13
  future as well. So, yeah, so, so that's, you
• 50:17
  know, that's a sort of, I oversee that as a secondary part
• 50:21
  of my role. I, I do things like this.
• 50:24
  I, you know, I go talk about personality science.
• 50:26
  I'm, I'm on the road about 50% of the year.
• 50:30
  I'm somewhere, I'm in some other country and, and I'm speaking to
• 50:34
  to our distributors there. I'm speaking to clients there
• 50:38
  about personality assessment, about leadership and and about
• 50:42
  how personality assessment can help them in their
• 50:45
  organizations. Ryan, tell us about the Science
• 50:51
  of Personality podcast. Who's your Co host?
• 50:54
  Where can we find it? What do you talk about?
• 50:56
  Sure. Yeah.
• 50:56
  So this was an idea that we had in about late 2019.
• 51:03
  We said, hey, we should start a podcast.
• 51:05
  We've got a lot of content. We have a lot of knowledge, a
• 51:06
  lot of information about personality.
• 51:09
  And we think maybe people would be interested in hearing about
• 51:12
  these kinds of things, this kind of information.
• 51:15
  And then COVID happened and we said, yeah, I think this might
• 51:19
  really be a good time to do that.
• 51:21
  And so in 2020, about mid year 2020, we had our first episode.
• 51:26
  I think we're around 100 and 20 episodes or something now we
• 51:31
  releasing a new episode every two weeks.
• 51:33
  You can find that on, you know, on Apple podcast, Spotify.
• 51:38
  You can also go to thescienceofpersonality.com as a
• 51:41
  dedicated website with our podcast as well.
• 51:45
  And my Co host is Blake Lepp, who's Hogan's PR manager.
• 51:49
  We, we decided that the two of us would do it because we would
• 51:52
  just have these conversations, you know, he, you know, him
• 51:56
  being in marketing and, and me being in research, we would just
• 52:00
  walk by and we'd be chatting about these things and about
• 52:02
  personality and about how it's relevant.
• 52:04
  And, and a lot of our podcasts, we make sports references
• 52:07
  because we talked about this athlete or this coach or this
• 52:10
  organization and what they're doing.
• 52:13
  And so we try to use those kinds of examples and talk about
• 52:18
  businesses and organizations. And we just basically translated
• 52:23
  those conversations that we would have into into these
• 52:26
  podcasts. We also bring on guests.
• 52:28
  I would say about about 7580% of our episodes have a guest that
• 52:33
  is usually some expert in some area.
• 52:36
  And, and we bring them on to talk about some recent study
• 52:39
  that they've done or, or some knowledge area that they have.
• 52:42
  We've had an incredible string of really amazing guests who
• 52:46
  who've come on to to talk about their experiences and their
• 52:50
  knowledge and share their research with us.
• 52:52
  But we've covered many, many topics all around personality,
• 52:55
  the dark side. We've talked about sleep and
• 52:57
  we've talked about all kinds of other psychologically
• 53:00
  interesting phenomena. We've we've done things on
• 53:04
  psychopaths and killers and other kinds of things on there
• 53:08
  also. We've had some really
• 53:09
  interesting guests. So yeah, if listeners are
• 53:11
  interested, you could go. You can go check that out.
• 53:15
  You don't have to listen to them all in order or anything, so you
• 53:18
  can just pick out the topics that.
• 53:20
  You want It's not a sequential kind of a series, like every
• 53:24
  episode is its own set of content.
• 53:25
  Yeah, that's right. To find a title that seems
• 53:27
  interesting to you and dive in. Yeah.
• 53:30
  Ryan, shifting gears on you would like to hear about a
• 53:33
  serious challenge that you've overcome in your life, whether
• 53:36
  it's personal or professional or combination of the two, What it
• 53:39
  was like getting through that and some lessons that you
• 53:42
  learned coming out the other side.
• 53:45
  Yeah, You know, you mentioned this before we, we, you know,
• 53:50
  started recording here, Anthony. And I have to admit that, you
• 53:53
  know, I feel guilty sort of even talking about this because I
• 53:56
  feel like the challenges that I've faced in my life are, are
• 53:59
  are, you know, not really much in comparison to what I've, I
• 54:04
  know many people have faced in their lives.
• 54:06
  And so it's sort of difficult for me to say, oh, this is a
• 54:08
  challenge that I face, but I feel like I know so many people
• 54:11
  have overcome much more difficult, you know, gosh, and
• 54:16
  it's like, I think I had a great childhood growing up.
• 54:18
  I had a great education, I had great, great opportunities.
• 54:22
  So it's hard for me to to say like, oh, I've really had a lot
• 54:24
  of challenges. But but one thing did come to
• 54:26
  mind for me, and that is that I've always felt for whatever
• 54:32
  reason, it's always sort of been overlooked and whatever for
• 54:40
  whatever it was, right? So I might, gosh, I could go
• 54:43
  back to, you know, being in grade school or even in middle
• 54:47
  school. And, you know, when you think
• 54:50
  about things like student council positions, when you
• 54:52
  think about playing, you know, for a sport, for sports teams
• 54:56
  and athletic teams and things like that, and just sort of
• 55:00
  being like, oh, this is a person who doesn't get picked.
• 55:02
  But then they go, oh, wait a minute, this person was better
• 55:03
  than we thought. You know, I, I felt that that,
• 55:08
  yeah, there's been lots of times for that.
• 55:10
  I think for Graduate School, I was one of the few graduate
• 55:14
  students taking The Who who got into Graduate School who was not
• 55:18
  given any additional funding. So I had to teach right away in
• 55:23
  Graduate School, but then later on won awards for being one of
• 55:27
  the top graduate students in the program.
• 55:29
  So it just always felt like, you know, I felt like when I was an
• 55:34
  academic, I mean, I applied for over 100 academic jobs coming
• 55:37
  out of Graduate School, more than 100 jobs.
• 55:40
  I got 2-3 interviews, I believe. Yeah, three interviews out of
• 55:47
  100 jobs. And I, thankfully I got, I did
• 55:49
  end up getting two job offers and ultimately took one.
• 55:54
  But then even subsequently I applied for probably over the
• 55:56
  next four or five years, another hundred jobs and got, you know,
• 56:01
  another maybe 3 interviews out of that.
• 56:03
  And which is I, I feel like even in, even in this role, I can
• 56:10
  remember after my first or second year in this role, the
• 56:14
  COO came up to me and said, you know, you're a lot better than
• 56:19
  we thought you were going to be. And I've always thought, yeah,
• 56:22
  I, I, this happens a lot. You know, I, I, I can tell you
• 56:25
  the, the other funny thing, Anthony, about having a PhD in,
• 56:28
  in some kind of field and you sort of being seen as, you know,
• 56:35
  quote UN quote, you know, smart guy, a science guy, something
• 56:38
  like that, is that people assume that you can't, you're not very
• 56:41
  athletic. But, you know, I was on the
• 56:44
  state championship baseball team.
• 56:46
  I was the captain of the team in high school.
• 56:49
  I played Division 3 baseball in college.
• 56:52
  I coach my kids baseball team now.
• 56:54
  And it's funny because every now and then we'll have a corporate
• 56:56
  event. Like we had a corporate
• 56:57
  pickleball event a few weeks ago and and some of the people in
• 57:01
  the company were like, oh wow, we didn't realize that you were
• 57:04
  athletic. I just, I just, I don't know.
• 57:07
  I so for me, I just feel like we often make assumptions about
• 57:13
  people. I guess that's what it means to
• 57:14
  me. And that, and I, I think part of
• 57:16
  this is my draw to personality assessments is that we often
• 57:19
  make assumptions about what we think people are like just how
• 57:23
  good they are at something or how or not.
• 57:25
  And a lot of times those assumptions are just wrong.
• 57:27
  We just based those assumptions on the wrong pieces of
• 57:29
  information. We based those assumptions on
• 57:31
  stereotypes. And, and so for me, I think
• 57:34
  that's part of the reason why I'm really drawn to personality
• 57:36
  assessments because they, they provide this opportunity for
• 57:39
  people to tell you who they are and, and, and, and to, and to
• 57:43
  describe themselves to you in a way that that we often don't see
• 57:47
  when we just look at them from the outside.
• 57:49
  So one thing I've noticed in my 50 plus years on this earth and
• 57:54
  interacting with people is that there are some people that sort
• 58:00
  of fall into the category that you described there where it's
• 58:02
  like, wow, like that person really ended up surprising me.
• 58:06
  And there are people sort of at the other end of the spectrum
• 58:08
  where it's like, and I thought they were going to be really
• 58:11
  good and they just were not. Well, most professional sports
• 58:15
  drafts are full of what we those kind of people are.
• 58:18
  Right, right. And what I've sort of
• 58:22
  ascertained from that and I don't have the the background
• 58:26
  that you do. So I'd be super curious to get
• 58:28
  your take on this is that you just have some people who are
• 58:32
  naturally better promoters, self promoters, like they know how to
• 58:37
  pump themselves up. There is AI don't know a
• 58:40
  charisma or a machismo or a confidence that comes through
• 58:45
  and sort of how they present themselves.
• 58:47
  And it's not always, you know, backed up by anything real.
• 58:54
  And then there are folks who they just, they just know how to
• 58:56
  get stuff done. They had to figure stuff out.
• 58:58
  They know how to roll up their sleeves and connect the dots and
• 59:01
  they're just, you know, they just, they don't present, they
• 59:06
  don't throw themselves kind of out there as well.
• 59:08
  And so they're a little bit easier to miss.
• 59:10
  Am I on to something here? Yeah, that that's absolutely the
• 59:13
  case. In fact, it's funny you
• 59:15
  mentioned it that way because we've done quite a bit of
• 59:17
  research on this, particular in the leadership space.
• 59:20
  There's when people think about studying leadership, they think
• 59:24
  it's study the people in charge. That's what it means to
• 59:26
  understand leadership. You got to go find the people
• 59:28
  who are in charge and study them.
• 59:29
  But it turns out that there's a fundamental difference between
• 59:33
  getting in charge of an organization and leading an
• 59:36
  organization effectively. And most research on leadership
• 59:39
  doesn't make that distinction. And it turns out certain people
• 59:43
  and personalities are really good predictor, by the way, of
• 59:45
  who gets into leadership positions.
• 59:47
  Like it predicts really well, like, you know, what we call
• 59:51
  leadership emergence and it's doing those kinds of things.
• 59:53
  It's it's having that charisma or, or what my kids tell me is
• 59:56
  rizz these days. You know that's a.
• 1:00:00
  New one for me. Am I right there having that,
• 1:00:03
  that, that, that kind of riz to, to get yourself into those
• 1:00:06
  leadership positions and other people don't they, they just
• 1:00:11
  don't, they don't do. So it's exactly what you just
• 1:00:13
  said. And it turns out that the
• 1:00:15
  relationship between leadership emergence and leadership
• 1:00:18
  effectiveness is really almost zero, that there's very little
• 1:00:22
  overlap between those two things.
• 1:00:24
  So you can be really emergent and be really effective or be
• 1:00:27
  terribly ineffective and we can't tell based on how you're,
• 1:00:32
  how emergent you are. But the thing that I've noticed
• 1:00:34
  is we fall in love all the time with leadership emergence.
• 1:00:39
  We fall in love with people who present a vision for the future
• 1:00:42
  who can tell us this is what's going to be great.
• 1:00:44
  This is what the future is going to look like with, with me in
• 1:00:46
  charge. And, and, and you see it all the
• 1:00:48
  time at shareholders meetings. You see it quite frankly and,
• 1:00:51
  and political campaigns, right? I mean, that's what it's all
• 1:00:56
  about. It's about selling some kind of
• 1:00:58
  a message that people are going to fall in love with.
• 1:01:01
  Whether you can deliver on that message or not is tends to often
• 1:01:04
  be irrelevant. It's it's much more about, you
• 1:01:07
  know, winning the game of getting in the position and less
• 1:01:10
  about being effective. And unfortunately as as humans,
• 1:01:15
  we we fall for it all the time. All the time, right?
• 1:01:18
  We we want that confident, charismatic person out front
• 1:01:24
  until they get there and we realize, wow, there was a whole
• 1:01:27
  lot of substance there. Do you have any advice or
• 1:01:31
  coaching to offer for people who kind of fit into this category?
• 1:01:36
  They are great at what they do. They would make great leaders,
• 1:01:40
  but they don't exhibit that. I think you called it leadership
• 1:01:43
  Emergence quality. Yeah.
• 1:01:46
  It's really challenging because a lot of these effective leaders
• 1:01:49
  tend to, they tend to actually be more humble, All right?
• 1:01:54
  So they actually have a tendency to not to sort of.
• 1:01:56
  Says the guy who did not like his title of chief science.
• 1:02:01
  Officer. Yeah, sorry, sorry.
• 1:02:03
  Go ahead. They they tend to downplay those
• 1:02:07
  kind of accomplishments. They tend not to advertise
• 1:02:09
  those. They tend to think that those
• 1:02:10
  things are irrelevant. And you know, the, the advice
• 1:02:15
  that we give them on the coaching front is, in fact, we
• 1:02:18
  have a model at Hogan about high potential and part of high
• 1:02:21
  potential is actually standing out.
• 1:02:23
  You have to do things to make yourself stand out.
• 1:02:25
  And so we coach them around that a little bit.
• 1:02:28
  Obviously, you have to be careful because if this goes too
• 1:02:30
  far, it can become problematic and it feels very unnatural for
• 1:02:33
  these individuals. They they even even when you
• 1:02:35
  coach them in these ways, they tend to still like, you know,
• 1:02:39
  you'll tell them, Hey, I want you to go over and, and, and you
• 1:02:42
  know, play yourself up on this particular thing that you worked
• 1:02:45
  on this thing and, and come back and tell us how you did.
• 1:02:47
  And they'll come back and tell you and you'll say, OK, well,
• 1:02:49
  how do you, you know, on a scale of, you know, one to 10 with one
• 1:02:53
  being totally lacking self-confidence and 10 being way
• 1:02:56
  overconfident, where do you think they were?
• 1:02:57
  They'll be like, oh, I was at 9 and everybody watching be like,
• 1:03:00
  you were three, like you're not, you're not even close to where
• 1:03:03
  you think, right. So, so we tend to just, we
• 1:03:06
  really have a hard time of stepping out of our comfort zone
• 1:03:10
  on those kinds of things. But but those are the kinds of
• 1:03:12
  things that that we might coach somebody like that to do.
• 1:03:16
  Ryan, I just have one more question for you.
• 1:03:17
  But before I ask it, I want to do 2 things.
• 1:03:19
  First of all, for everyone listening today, I know that you
• 1:03:22
  love today's content. Ryan has been an amazing guest.
• 1:03:24
  Please hit the like Share subscribe button in your
• 1:03:27
  favorite podcast app. Ryan, I also want to let people
• 1:03:29
  know the best way to get in touch with you.
• 1:03:31
  What would that be? Yeah, the the best way to get in
• 1:03:34
  contact with me is LinkedIn I I have people who connect with me.
• 1:03:36
  They're on I and you know, if you, if you, I only say I only
• 1:03:42
  don't connect with people who are clearly trying to sell me
• 1:03:45
  something. So you know, if you're, you
• 1:03:48
  know, if you're, if, if you're an honest listener and you just
• 1:03:50
  want to be connected on LinkedIn, I'm happy to connect
• 1:03:52
  with people there. So that's a great way.
• 1:03:54
  If you have questions, you want to message me there as well.
• 1:03:57
  And, and if we have to go dig deeper, I'm happy to share,
• 1:03:59
  share my e-mail with you through that and go into further
• 1:04:03
  questions. But but that's the best place to
• 1:04:05
  reach out. So we'll be sure very easy to
• 1:04:07
  find because my name is pretty unique.
• 1:04:09
  So is, yeah. Yeah, drying is part is spelled
• 1:04:12
  RYNE and then Sherman just like it sounds Sherman.
• 1:04:18
  So you can search on that if you just happen to be listening.
• 1:04:20
  If you're somewhere where you're able to see the show notes,
• 1:04:24
  we'll put a link to his LinkedIn profile there in the show notes.
• 1:04:28
  So last question for you, Ryan is I'm kind of curious what you
• 1:04:32
  see the big changes coming to the assessment industry in the
• 1:04:36
  next couple of years. How do you see things kind of
• 1:04:38
  opening up here? Yeah.
• 1:04:41
  Well, technology is always having the biggest impact.
• 1:04:43
  And I mean there are, you know, we we've talked earlier about
• 1:04:47
  the sort of way we do assessments sort of being this
• 1:04:48
  traditional way. And I think, you know, I'm very
• 1:04:52
  open to alternative ways of doing assessments to, you know,
• 1:04:56
  when we, we carry these things around in our pockets that track
• 1:04:59
  where we go, who we interact with, they, they track what we
• 1:05:01
  say and do all the time. Perhaps that's a better way to
• 1:05:06
  get insight into who we are as individuals and, and to provide
• 1:05:09
  those insights into, into people.
• 1:05:11
  Those are the kind of technology things that I'm looking for
• 1:05:13
  going forward. I think obviously artificial
• 1:05:15
  intelligence is having a big impact in the way the assessment
• 1:05:18
  world works and how assessments are developed, how people take
• 1:05:21
  assessments, how people combat potential cheating, using
• 1:05:25
  artificial intelligence to take assessments and those kinds of
• 1:05:28
  things as well. So those are the kinds of things
• 1:05:30
  that we're working on here. But I think artificial
• 1:05:33
  intelligence has the the potential to provide more
• 1:05:37
  coaching in a pocket for individuals as well to provide
• 1:05:39
  insight to individuals that they can use on a day-to-day basis.
• 1:05:43
  And I, and I think that that's for the future of the assessment
• 1:05:45
  world is going is, is sort of a democratizing assessment, making
• 1:05:49
  it so that assessment isn't just for people who work at the
• 1:05:52
  biggest companies in the world, but also for for most everyday
• 1:05:55
  people who can get really highly valid scientific assessments to
• 1:05:59
  help them in their own individual lives.
• 1:06:02
  Ryan, I want to be the first one to thank you for sharing both
• 1:06:04
  your time and your story with us today.
• 1:06:06
  I really appreciate it. Well, thank you so much for
• 1:06:08
  having me, Anthony. I really appreciate the
• 1:06:10
  conversation. Folks, that's a wrap on another
• 1:06:13
  episode of the Inspired Stories podcast.
• 1:06:15
  Thanks for learning with us today.