Herrmann HBDI Certifi cation Workshop · Tel.: +61 2 9880 2333 - Fax: +61 2 9880 2343 - Email:...
Transcript of Herrmann HBDI Certifi cation Workshop · Tel.: +61 2 9880 2333 - Fax: +61 2 9880 2343 - Email:...
Herrmann HBDI® Certifi cation Workshop
Tab 6: The HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
© Herrmann Global 2017
1
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Introduction:
There are many fl exible delivery options you can use to meet your team’s needs with the best learning program for them. You can select from in-person classroom delivery, online delivery or both in a blended design.
Always begin your preparation using this HBDI® Team Profi le guide to analyze the team’s report.
Prerequisites: All team members must complete the HBDI® Assessment and receive an in-person or online debrief before attending the Team Session, or the debrief can be facilitated for a team the fi rst part of the day. Relevant articles and(or) activities may be assigned for reading prior to the event.
There are three basic learning paths for debriefi ng and engaging participants with the HBDI® Team Profi le Report:
I. Business of Thinking: ThinkAbout Teams Workshop (Approximately 3.5 –5.5 hours)
This workshop gets teams to think about the tasks they are facing, the individuals that make up the teams and the best way they can work together to achieve their goal. It results in highly motivated teams of individuals who can maximize their unique contribution while appreciating and encouraging the contribution of others.
**See the Business of Thinking; ThinkAbout Teams Facilitator Guide
II. HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief In-person session
(Approximately 2.0 – 2.25 hours)
This session is best when there is limited time and a specifi c application in mind. Because it is a shortened version of The Business of Thinking® module ThinkAbout Teams, it is designed for a focused objective rather than a general understanding. Use it when a team needs to do strategic planning, create innovation or have a project to complete.
**See the HBDI® Team Profi le Facilitator’s Debrief Guide
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
2
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
III. Online HBDI® Team Webinars
(1.5 hours Core Debrief featuring the Composite, Average, Preference Map and Scores/Adjective Pairs)
Immediately improve eff ectiveness, communication and productivity with the HBDI® Team Profi le In Action Webinar. This interactive webinar uses the HBDI® team data to provide a revealing analysis of areas of opportunity, confl ict and stress. Team members leave with an action plan on how they will apply Whole Brain® Thinking to their advantage, as individuals and as a team.
(2.5 – 3.5 hours Custom Team Webinars)
Custom Team Webinars explore team reports containing a variety of data sets to explore, compare and contrast with highly interactive activities and discussion with team members.
Contact your Herrmann Representative for support with team webinars.
Note: Coaching as well as additional application learning tools and workshops are also available.
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
3
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Analyzing an HBDI® Team Profi le
The HBDI® Team Profi le is an excellent way to initiate discussions with a team or group. The data can open areas of opportunity, as well as confl ict and stress, without the ‘emotional baggage’ often associated with group interaction. The HBDI® Team Profi le includes thirteen reports and is fi lled with a variety of data sets to explore, compare, and contrast. While each person’s thinking preferences are represented, they are all displayed confi dentially. Only certifi ed practitioners are given a legend, so there’s no danger of disclosing information that is to be held in confi dence.
As you go through the various reports included in the HBDI® Team Profi le, be on the lookout for sensitive or potentially challenging topics. The value of these reports is that they are data driven. The data often helps to remove the emotion from sensitive areas. If individuals have a good grasp of their personal profi le and its
implications, they will be in a better position to fully understand the HBDI® Team Profi le.
Each report is described in the following pages along with suggestions/ideas on how to analyze it in order to identify the key points.
ArTfocoaoeino
© 2004 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc.
HerrmannInternational
Herrmann International Asia PO Box 383 Pymble NSW 2073 AustraliaTel.: +61 2 9880 2333 - Fax: +61 2 9880 2343 - Email: [email protected] - Web : www.herrmannasia.com
HBDI™ Team Profile
HBDI
™ T
eam
Pro
file
Participants
Sample Team Pack
CLARKE, BOBGALIK, MATTHEW P
GOWING, TRICIAHOUSTON, CAMERON
LINDSAY, JACKIEMAYBURY, AILSA
MITCHINSON, CARAMORGAN, CHRIS
MORGAN, MICHAELPARKE, DIANE
ROMAN, SASHASILVIO, GRACETOBIAS, IRWINWELSH, JENNY
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
4
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Graphic Presentation of Composite Profi le
The Group Composite Profi le is an overlay of each individual’s HBDI® Profi le on the profi le grid. This report demonstrates strengths of preference both for individuals and the group or team for each quadrant of the Whole Brain® Model. It also displays areas of lesser preference for each quadrant.
What to look for
Is the range of preference within each quadrant?
Is there a broad range within the same quadrant—profi les with strong preference scores over 100 and other profi les that are in the low preference range of 10-33? Is there a narrow range of preference within one quadrant?
In which quadrants does the team have strong or very strong preferences?
In which quadrants does it have intermediate preferences?
In which quadrants does it have low preferences?
Are there some ‘spikes’ (e.g., people who have a very high score)? What are the implications?
How do the upper mode and lower mode compare? What are the implications?
How do the left mode and right mode compare? What are the implications?
Here are some points to bring out during the discussion of this report when they apply to this team
If there is a broad range of scores within a quadrant, many points of view will be represented.
A great range of preference can be an initial place to look for confl ict or stress.
Quadrants where the range of preference is narrow can be quadrants where the group experiences ‘group think’—a benefi t at times and at other times a possible hindrance.
Heterogeneity is often a gauge of the potential breadth of thinking of a group/team as they face diff erent situations and challenges.
More information
Read page 11 in the HBDI® Profi le section (B). Reading Your Profi le Step by Step for the explanation of left mode vs. right mode and upper mode vs. lower mode.
Httra
Graphic Presentation of Composite Profile
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 4/16
Strong Preference
Intermediate Preference
Low Preference
A
B C
Dfactualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
40%Left
Mode60%
Right
Mode
49%
Upper Mode
51%
Lower Mode
The percentages indicate the preferences for one mode compared to the opposite mode
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
5
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Graphic Presentation of Average Profi le
The solid black line diagram shows the overall group/team preferences for each quadrant. The dotted line diagram shows the adjective pairs scores for each quadrant. The adjective pairs scores show how an individual or team operates under pressure. The group average is developed by calculating the average of each of the quadrant scores (adding each individual’s score in a quadrant, and then dividing the total for that quadrant by the number of participants). Each quadrant average score is plotted on the HBDI® Profi le grid. The average profi le can highlight the degree of similarity and/or diff erence between each of the four quadrants that may translate into a signifi cant preference for one versus a low preference for another. This display charts preferences for the quadrants by mapping the data in the primary preference (<67), secondary/intermediate preference (34-66) or lower preference zones (0-33).
What to look for
Is there a distinct tilt toward one or more quadrants? What are the implications?
Is there a diff erence of more than 20 points between any two quadrants?
Which are the most preferred quadrants? least preferred?
What are the implications of that?
Is the profi le ‘balanced’ with scores in all quadrants within 6-8 points of each other?
If this is a balanced profi le, are the scores the result of most team members having similar scores or the result of a wide-range of scores that average out more in the middle?
How does the normal tilt compare with the adjective pairs (under stress) tilt?
Points to bring out during the discussion
of this report if they apply to this team
Diff erences of more that 20 points between quadrants can be signifi cant.
Diff erences of degree of preference across the diagonal axis (A vs. C or B vs. D) can indicate exaggerated tilts toward the quadrant of preference and possible gaps in the quadrant of low preference. When a strong preference is juxtaposed to a low preference on the diagonal, verify if the average score in the quadrant of strong preference is made up of similar scores or the result of a wide-range of scores that average out more in the middle? When it is the result of similar scores, this indicates a potential ‘blind spot’ of strong preference and potentially low preference in the opposing quadrant.
A very ‘balanced’ average profi le should be explored in conjunction with the Graphic Composite Profi le. The average can be easily misinterpreted if it is read without taking into consideration the nature of the profi les or the number of participants. For example,
Graphic Presentation of Average Profile
Profile Scores Adjective Pairs
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 5/16
Thinkers Innovators
Organisers Database Average Humanitarians
Strong Preference
Intermediate Preference
Low Preference
A
B C
D57
64 90
90
factualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
40%Left
Mode60%
Right
Mode
49%
Upper Mode
51%
Lower Mode
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
6
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
an average of two people with opposing profi les will display a balanced profi le. A balanced profi le could also be obtained by averaging two similar multi-dominant profi les.
Homogeneous teams that are comprised of mostly balanced profi les will often experience good ‘coverage’ of styles across the model, with eff ective communication but also may represent a lack of specialized thinking where it may be needed.
More heterogeneous teams comprised of very diff erent profi les will have the opportunity to benefi t from the broader spectrum of specialized thinking preferences but may suff er from some miscommunication between team members.
More information
Research has shown that a balance between multi-dominant profi les and strong quadrant specifi c profi les leads to a potentially more eff ective and creative group. For more information on this research see our website www.hbdi.com and go to the ‘articles’ page or www.hbdi.com/articles.html to see the article “How to Improve Group Productivity: Whole-brain Teams Set New Benchmarks” by Charles G. DeRidder and Mark A. Wilcox
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
7
The HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Debrief Section
Rank Order of Team Preferences by Quadrant
This display shows the rank order of overall preferences for the group/team, in descending order of preference from most to least. This often refl ects the direction of the group’s thinking in their day-to-day work process (not in times of stress).
What to look for
What do these preferences suggest about how the team may approach its work or spend its time? What problems might that create for a team?
How does that match up with your experience of the team?
How does this refl ect or impact the priorities of the team?
What is the work-fl ow process of your group? Which quadrant does it often start with? Why? What next? Etc.
What are the implications for your eff ectiveness? Are there areas you never ‘get to’ or that create problems for the group? How might you better address those?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
The group can appoint a person on the team to be the ‘watchdog’ for the quadrant that is least preferred. For a group whose rank order of preferences displays a strong preference for A and a lesser preference for the C quadrant for example, they may
appoint the person with the strongest preference in C to be their watchdog or ‘internal consultant’. For each action point they could then check in with their ‘advisor’ for feedback. To make sure they are not overlooking that quadrant.
Often when groups gather for a meeting they begin where they are most comfortable and end the meeting before they get to areas where they are less comfortable. This is true of thinking preferences as well. The Rank Order of Preferences report will confi rm for many where their tasks and topics originate due to the strongest preferences and areas they never ‘get around to’ due to the group’s lack of preference. For example, a group whose strongest preferences are in the D Quadrant may spend their hour meeting brainstorming and then leave with no action plan because the B quadrant is their least preferred. The Rank Order of Preferences Report can bring this to light for the group without placing blame.
The group may wish to develop an action plan for improved eff ectiveness with this data in mind.
Rank Order of Team Preferences byQuadrant
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 6/16
The rank order of preferences of this team as a whole:
D Upper Right 90
C Lower Right 90
B Lower Left 64
A Upper Left 57
© Herrmann Global 2017
8
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
This top display shows the fl ow of preferences from most preferred to least preferred. The lower graphic uses the Adjective Pairs data to show the fl ow of preferences when the team is under pressure. The two preference fl ows may be diff erent. Next to each quadrant is found the percentage of the total that each quadrant represents.
What to look for
Is there a quadrant the team is likely to skip due to low preference?
How does the normal fl ow compare with the fl ow under pressure (e.g., Adjective Pairs)?
Where does this team go under pressure?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Small diff erences between quadrants will not signifi cantly impact the fl ow of work or the priorities of the team.
Big diff erences of 12 points or more will see an impact on the fl ow of the work and where priorities fall.
The Rank Order of Preferences by Quadrant is an excellent report to show a team how they can use this team data.
— For example, a group whose strongest preferences are in the D Quadrant may spend an hour meeting doing brainstorming and then leave with no action plan because the B quadrant is their least preferred. To make sure that
the team leaves with action items, it can agree to allow 10 minutes at the end of each meeting to develop an action plan.
— For a group whose Rank Order of Preferences displays a strong preference for A and a lesser preference for the C quadrant, they may appoint the person with the strongest preference in C to be their ‘internal consultant’. For each action point they could then check in with their ‘advisor’ for feedback.
Process Flow of Preferences
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 7/16
Alternate style from Adjective Pairs
A D
B C
19%
21% 30%
30%Facts Future
Form Feeling
19%
22% 34%
25%
This graphic presents the alternateflow of preferences according to theAdjective Pairs section averageresults.The Adjective Pairs result tells ussomething about how we react whenunder pressure.This may or may not be consistentwith the general behavior of this team.
A D
B C
Debrief Section
Process Flow of Preferences
© Herrmann Global 2017
9
The HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Scores above 100 represent very strong preferences that are often very visible to others. They frequently have a strong impact on group process.
Scores below 33 will also have an impact on group process by their absence of preference.
A big range may indicate very diff erent, contrasting viewpoints within the group.
A small range often indicates an area where the group shares that level of preference, whatever that might be; low, intermediate, or high. That homogeneity of preference for that quadrant often provides a ‘shared space’ for the group.
— If that shared space is in an area of high preference, then the outcome may be a ‘tribal-like’ sharing of viewpoints and perspectives.
— If the homogeneity falls into an intermediate preference, then there is most likely a comfort zone for the group as a whole in that mode, but no passion or highly specialized preferences in that quadrant.
— If the small range falls into a low preference zone, then the group may collectively lack energy for that approach and could overlook important aspects of a problem or situation relating to that quadrant.
The HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
HBDI® Profi le Results: List of Scores
Profile Results: List of Scores
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack
Upper Left Lower Left Lower Right Upper Right Intro/Extro
Profile 5 87 63 78 56 7/9
Profile 6 48 90 75 81 7/9
Profile 7 24 50 137 98 7/9
Profile 1 29 68 135 65 2/9
Profile 13 51 75 98 66 8/9
Profile 9 69 90 92 45 4/9
Profile 4 66 77 92 71 5/9
Profile 11 30 35 98 150 6/9
Profile 10 48 57 83 128 3/9
Profile 2 78 35 57 126 7/9
Profile 3 74 65 69 96 7/9
Profile 8 54 75 75 95 8/9
Profile 12 78 53 80 92 7/9
Page 8/16
Sum 736 833 1169 1169 78Average 57 64 90 90 6Min 24 35 57 45 2Max 87 90 137 150 8Std. dev. 19.8 17.2 22.6 29.5 1.8Med. 54 65 83 92 7Range 63 55 80 105 6
Debrief Section
This detailed list provides comprehensive profi le information in numeric form, listing the A, B, C, and D scores for each participant. It also lists the individual’s introvert/extrovert scores. This is taken from question number 100 on the HBDI®.
This list is organized by quadrant preference, going from most left to most right scores in the Whole Brain® Model. See HBDI® Team Profi le Participants for the list of participants by number. The group has a list. Participants can usually fi nd their profi le in the list.
Each person’s quadrant scores are displayed as well as the total score for each quadrant, the average score and standard deviation. In addition, the Median (e.g., an equal number of scores are above and below), Minimum, Maximum scores and the Range of scores for each quadrant are also calculated.
What to look for
What’s the range in each quadrant? Wide or narrow?
Where are the scores above 100? In each quadrant? In several quadrants?
Are there any very strong preference scores (e.g., over 133)?
Are there any scores below 33?
What, if any, problems might occur because of
the ranges?
© Herrmann Global 2017
10
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Preference Map
The Preference Map is a very powerful visual display that indicates the ‘preference tilt’ of each participant. Each person’s profi le is miniaturized and placed on the map based on its degree of preference; the more whole brained a profi le (1111, 1112, 2111, 1211, 1121, 1212, 2121) is, the closer to the center of the grid it appears. As profi les are placed away from the center toward the A, B, C, or D positions, the degree of ‘tilt’ for those quadrants increases. When profi les are placed toward the Left, Right, Upper and Lower positions, the preferences for those modes are stronger. This shows how each individual profi le is similar or diff erent from the position of the other profi les on the team. This helps show how heterogeneous or homogeneous the team is.
The entire team’s ‘preference tilt’ is also shown on the preference map. This is the average tilt of the entire team and is shown as a large white circle.
‘Mini-tribes’ or clusters of similar preference are easily identifi ed. If two or more profi les are in close proximity on the map, those individuals will often demonstrate similar thinking preferences—perhaps even ‘group-think’. Profi les that are a great distance apart will display very diff ering preferences.
The degree of introvert/extrovert of each individual is also shown. In the miniaturized profi les. The grey scale at the bottom of the page indicates the shading used to show the degree of introvert/extrovert.
What to look for Are there clusters (or
mini-tribes)? What are the implications?
Where is the natural pull on this team (e.g., right, left, upper, lower)?
Are there loners (profi les that are alone/separate from the other profi les on the map)?
What are the implications of this distribution?
The degree of introvert/extrovert in each individual.
As a facilitator, what are the dynamics in the room likely to be? How will you interact with the group (e.g., Are you a loner)?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Individuals who are part of the team/group but have diff erent preferences from others may feel this ‘separateness’ during group interactions.
Those who are more multi-dominant and balanced are found in the center of this grid.
Those who are more cognitive and intellectual are more toward the upper position.
Those who are more grounded and instinctual are more toward the lower position.
Those who are more pragmatic and realistic are toward the left position.
Those who are more intuitive and open are toward the right position.
Preference Map
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 9/16
A
B C
Dfactualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
Introvert Extrovert
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1011
12
13
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
11
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
There also can be profi les that are more singular in preference. Those will be positioned more toward the A, B, C and D
letters found around the grid.
Word of caution
Some individuals will relish being a ‘loner’, while others may be uncomfortable with it. This person’s data will most likely be ‘obvious’ to the others in the group. So in fact you will be disclosing confi dential data if you share the preference map with the group, who will recognize the loner. If you have a ‘loner’, be sure to disclose this report to the individual before
sharing it with the group to verify they are comfortable with your approach. It’s better to be safe than sorry when it comes to revealing confi dential data.
When you have carefully staged your presentation of individual data, more often than not, individuals will feel proud of their HBDI® Profi le, no matter where their data falls on the Preference Map.
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
12
The HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Scores/Adjective Pairs
This report shows two views of the Preference Map. The upper map shows team member preferences when they are not under stress. The lower map shows the team members preferences when they are under stress.
What to look for
What, if anything, happens to this team under stress?
Where are the clusters or mini tribes when the team is under stress?
Where are the loners when the team is under stress?
What are the implications of the diff erences between the team under stress and the team when it isn’t under stress?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
The profi les on the adjective pair preference map often seem to ‘explode outward’ in comparison to the regular preference map. You can explain this by reminding participants
that under stress, profi les often shift toward quadrants of stronger preference, which can accentuate the diff erences between profi les.
If the two preference maps are similar, that may indicate that there is very little shift under stress. However, there is still an opportunity to discuss with the group what impact stress has on their productivity, team dynamics or other factors.
Scores
Scores / Adjective Pairs
Adjective Pairs
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 10/16
A
B C
D
A
B C
D
factualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
factualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
1
2
3
4
56
7
8
9
10 11
12
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1011
12
13
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
13
The HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Work Elements by Quadrant
The Work Elements section of the HBDI® Assessment Form asks the individual to rank Work Elements from 1 to 5: ‘5’ being work they do best and ‘1’ being work they do least well. This report presents the data individually. Each bar represents the response for one individual (the position of the bar for each person is consistent in all of the graphs). The bars are clustered by quadrant for ‘at a glance’ group understanding. Close inspection reveals the areas each individual reported does his or her ‘best work’ as well as the work that individual reported doing ‘least well’. This can give you a new perspective on individual data. For example, one individual’s bar may show ‘5s’ in all four A Quadrant Work Elements and ‘1s’ or ‘2s’ in the C Quadrant Work Elements.
What to look for
Is there at least one 5 on each Work Element?
Are there Work Elements that have mostly 1s? What are the implications?
Are there any Work Elements where the group is divided between extreme preference and a lack of preference?
What are the implications?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
A score of 3 can be misleading because sometimes people rate an element a 3 because they have run out of ‘4s’ and ‘5s’. Therefore, some ‘3s’ actually represent areas of strength.
The sequence of the bars representing the scores for each element is in the same order for each element cross all four quadrants. Thus, the fi rst bar for analytical, technical, problem solving, fi nancial, etc. represent the data selections for the same participant.
A score of 1 or 2 usually represents a work activity that is not strong; a 1 may mean an activity that is a very low priority.
Work Elements by Quadrant
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 11/16
1
2
3
4
5
analytical
1
2
3
4
5
technical
1
2
3
4
5
integration
1
2
3
4
5
conceptualising
1
2
3
4
5
problem solving
1
2
3
4
5
financial
1
2
3
4
5
creative
1
2
3
4
5
innovating
1
2
3
4
5
organisation
1
2
3
4
5
planning
1
2
3
4
5
teaching
1
2
3
4
5
writing
1
2
3
4
5
administrative
1
2
3
4
5
implementation
1
2
3
4
5
expressing
1
2
3
4
5
interpersonal
A D
B C
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
14
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Rank Order of Work Elements
By averaging and rank ordering the rating of each Work Element, you will be able to immediately recognize the strengths of the group. You will also readily recognize areas of lesser preference.
What to look for
Which work elements are rated the strongest?
Which are rated the weakest?
Which quadrants have the strongest preferences?
Which quadrants have the lowest preferences?
What are the implications?
How do the preferred work elements align with the team’s tasks?
How do the work elements compare with the team’s normal average profi le vs. its adjective pairs profi le?
Debrief Section
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Just because a work element shows up in the middle doesn’t mean that the team is only moderately competent. Several team members may have rated those elements
with ‘3s’ because they ran out of ‘4s’ and ‘5s’.
Keep the Work Elements in mind to compare with the Key Descriptors. Work Elements are focused on how people see themselves at work. Key Descriptors refl ect a person’s more general assessment of their preferences which includes both work and the rest of their life.
Rank Order of Work Elements
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 12/16
technical
financial
administrative
planning
organisation
creative
innovating
implementation
conceptualising
analytical
writing
integration
expressing
problem solving
teaching
interpersonal
1 2 3 4 5Averages
© Herrmann Global 2017
15
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Key Descriptors by Quadrant
analytical
logical
mathematical
rational
critical
quantitative
factual
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Most descriptive Selected
spatial
simultaneous
synthesiser
holistic
intuitive
artistic
imaginative
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Most descriptive Selected
reader
speaker
dominant
detailed
sequential
controlled
conservative
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Most descriptive Selected
reader
talker
intuitive
symbolic
spiritual
musical
emotional
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Most descriptive Selected
A D
Key Descriptors by Quadrant
In this report each bar displays the percentage of the group that chose each of the 28 Key Descriptors. Individuals choose eight Descriptors that best describe them and then identify one of the eight as the most descriptive. The bar chart also displays the percentage of the group that has descriptors chosen as ‘most’ descriptive.
In contrast to the Work Elements, the Key Descriptors refl ect individuals’ more ‘general’ description of themselves.
What to look for
What’s the distribution by quadrant?
Which quadrants have the most?
Which quadrants have the least?
Which Key Descriptors were identifi ed as most descriptive? How can those impact a team or work group?
How do the Key Descriptors compare with the Work Elements? Are there areas where participants have
identifi ed preferences in their Key Descriptors that are not refl ected in the Work Elements?
Are there quadrants that are consistently strongly preferred in both Work Elements and Key Descriptors?
Are there quadrants that are consistently least preferred in both Work Elements and Key Descriptors?
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
16
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Rank Order of Key Descriptors
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 14/16
mathematical (0%)
artistic (8%)
conservative (8%)
sequential (8%)
quantitative (8%)
spiritual (15%)
dominant (15%)
symbolic (23%)
synthesiser (31%)
spatial (31%)
simultaneous (31%)
reader (31%)
reader (31%)
critical (31%)
controlled (31%)
analytical (38%)
holistic (38%)
rational (38%)
factual (38%)
imaginative (38%)
detailed (38%)
musical (46%)
talker (54%)
speaker (54%)
emotional (62%)
intuitive (69%)
intuitive (69%)
logical (69%)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Averages
Rank Order of Key Descriptors
The rank ordering of Key Descriptors shows which descriptors were selected more than others and which descriptors were not selected at all. The bars are color coded by quadrant for easy identifi cation.
What to look for
What are the top 5 Key Descriptors?
Are they from one or two quadrants or distributed among all four?
What are the bottom 5 Key Descriptors?
Are they from one or two quadrants or distributed among all four?
Which Key Descriptors are possible developmental areas? These typically are those that score below 50%.
How do the Key Descriptors compare with the Work Elements in terms of distribution by quadrant? The Work Elements often refl ect what a team is good at—the Key Descriptors often refl ect what a team prefers to do.
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Scores less that 50% can often be development areas for the team.
The top 4 or 5 Key Descriptors can have a huge impact on the team.
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
17
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Adjective Pairs Comparison
The Adjective Pair Comparison shows which Adjective Pair was selected by the group. The bars are color coded by quadrant for easy identifi cation. The % fi gures along the bottom of the chart show how many of the team selected each adjective.
What to look for
Which Adjective Pairs did the majority of the team select?
Which Adjective Pairs did the team demonstrate a low preference?
Which of those selections might be signifi cant?
Where are the areas of potential confl ict? Which Adjective Pairs are likely to be an issue for a team?
What is the context in which the team is working and what impact will their selection have?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Adjectives that the majority of the team selected—and their implications.
Adjectives which have been equally selected—and their implications.
The Adjective Pairs refl ect how the group may think under pressure.
Adjective Pairs Comparison
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 15/16
originate ideas / test and prove ideas
communicator / conceptualiser
musical / detailed
analyst / synthesiser
spiritual / creative
technical / dominant
well-organised / logical
feeling / thinking
problem solver / planner
controlled / emotional
controlled / creative
original / emotional
rigorous thinking / metaphorical thinking
simultaneous / empathetic
detailed / holistic
quantitative / musical
imaginative / sequential
original / reliable
interpersonal / organiser
creative / logical
warm, friendly / analytical
technical things / people-oriented
conservative / empathetic
like things planned / like things mathematical
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Averages
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
18
The HBDI® Team Profi le GuideThe HBDI® Team Profi le Guide
Twenty Question ComparisonThe Twenty Question Comparison shows how the group answered each question. The % fi gures along the top of each question indicate the % of the team that made that particular selection. For example, if there is a fi gure of 5% at the ‘strongly agree’ end, that indicates that 5% of the group selected ‘strongly agree’. The % fi gures in brackets indicate the total % of the group that selected either ‘agree or strongly agree’ as opposed to ‘disagree or strongly disagree’ or neutral.
What to look for
Which questions did the majority of the team agree with?
Which questions did the majority of the team disagree with?
Which of those selections might be signifi cant?
Which questions are more signifi cant than others?
Which questions are not so important?
What is the context in which the team is working and what impact will their selection have?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Those questions the team strongly agree with or disagree.
Those questions where the team does not mind.
Conclusions
Once you’ve analyzed the HBDI® Team Profi le, you have a good idea of the key points you’d like to bring out from the diff erent reports.
Be ready for the individuals who want to breeze right through the reports, while there are others who want to ‘dig-in’ to the data. Try to fi nd a balance that works for the whole group.
While the HBDI® Team Profi le reveals a tremendous amount of data, it does not prescribe remedies for team or group challenges. It starts the team on the path to discovering why there are challenges and how the team can move forward in the future to more eff ectively address those challenges.
Twenty Questions Comparison
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 16/16
Q 20
Q 19
Q 18
Q 17
Q 16
Q 15
Q 14
Q 13
Q 12
Q 11
Q 10
Q 9
Q 8
Q 7
Q 6
Q 5
Q 4
Q 3
Q 2
Q 1
I feel that laws should be strictly enforced.0% [31%] 31% 46% 23% [23%] 0%
I tend to rely more on my first impressions and feelings when making judgments than on a careful analysis of the situation.31% [77%] 46% 23% 0% [0%] 0%
I can frequently anticipate the solutions to my problems.15% [77%] 62% 23% 0% [0%] 0%
Thorough planning and organization of time are mandatory for solving difficult problems.15% [38%] 23% 23% 38% [38%] 0%
Know-why is more important than know-how.23% [69%] 46% 23% 8% [8%] 0%
I prefer specific instructions to those which leave many details optional.8% [54%] 46% 15% 23% [31%] 8%
Unusual ideas and daring concepts interest and intrigue me.31% [69%] 38% 23% 8% [8%] 0%
It is important for me to have a place for everything and everything in its place.8% [46%] 38% 46% 0% [8%] 8%
I prefer to work with others in a team effort rather than solo.8% [31%] 23% 46% 23% [23%] 0%
I dislike things being uncertain and unpredictable.8% [31%] 23% 15% 54% [54%] 0%
I would enjoy spending an entire day "alone with my thoughts."31% [62%] 31% 0% 23% [38%] 15%
I'm basically more competitive with others than self-competitive.8% [31%] 23% 8% 38% [61%] 23%
Much of what is most important in life cannot be expressed in words.31% [69%] 38% 8% 23% [23%] 0%
I sometimes get a kick out of breaking the rules and doing things I'm not supposed to do.23% [69%] 46% 0% 31% [31%] 0%
I rely on hunches and the feeling of "rightness" or "wrongness" when moving toward the solution to a problem.46% [84%] 38% 15% 0% [0%] 0%
I often get my best ideas when doing nothing in particular.38% [84%] 46% 15% 0% [0%] 0%
I would rather be known as a reliable than an imaginative person.15% [46%] 31% 23% 23% [31%] 8%
I like people who are most sure of their conclusions.8% [46%] 38% 38% 15% [15%] 0%
Daydreaming has provided the impetus for the solution of many of my more important problems.15% [61%] 46% 31% 8% [8%] 0%
I feel that a step by step method is best for solving problems.15% [69%] 54% 15% 15% [15%] 0%
strongly agree strongly disagree
Debrief Section© Herrmann Global 2017
HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Facilitator Debrief Guide
© Herrmann Global 2017
21
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
21
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesTable of Contents
Module at a Glance ....................................................... 22
Preparation Checklist ................................................... 23
Flip Charts ...................................................................... 24
Icon Legend ................................................................... 25
Unit Description/Learning Objectives ........................ 26
Facilitator Guide for this Module
1. Module Introduction ........................................... 28
2. Graphic Presentation of Composite Profi le ...... 30
3. Graphic Presentation of Average Profi le .......... 32
4. Rank Order of Team Preferences by Quadrant 34
5. Process Flow of Preferences ............................... 36
6. Profi le Results: List of Scores ................................38
7. Preference Map ......................................................40
8. Preference Map Scores/Adjective Pairs ..............42
9. Work Elements by Quadrant .................................43
10. Rank Order of Work Elements ..............................45
11. Key Descriptors by Quadrant ................................47
12. Rank Order of Key Descriptors .............................49
13. Adjective Pair Comparison ....................................50
14. Twenty Question Comparison ..............................51
15. Conclusions ............................................................ 52
© Herrmann Global 2017
22
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
22
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesModule at a Glance
Unit Time Page Description/PurposeIntroduction 10 mins 28
Review of Whole Brain® Model 5 mins 29
Graphic representation 10 mins 30of composite Team Profi le
Graphic representation 10 mins 32of average profi le
Rank order of 10 mins 34Team Preferencesby Quadrant
Process Flow of 10 mins 36Preferences
Profi le Results: 10 mins 38List of scores
Preference 10 mins 40 Map
Preference Map Scores/ 10 mins 42Adjective Pairs
Work Elements 10 mins 43 by Quadrant
Rank Order of 10 mins 45 Work Elements
Key Descriptors 10 mins 47 by Quadrant
Rank Order of 10 mins 49 Key Descriptors
Adjective Pair 10 mins 50Comparison
Twenty Questions 10 mins 51Comparison
Total Time 125 mins
Each section focuses on a specifi c report in
the team package. The specifi c team data is
shared and explained followed by a discussion on the implications for
the team.
Sets the scene, breaks the ice and covers housekeeping
Reviews understanding of Whole Brain® Model
© Herrmann Global 2017
23
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
23
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesPreparation Checklist
ASSEMBLE these materials before conducting the workshop
HBDI® Team Packages for each participant
Team profi le package to leave with the team leader for ongoing use (complete with overheads)
Whole Brain® Wall Chart(s) (need to be ordered from Herrmann International)
Workshop evaluations
Miscellaneous materials (colored paper; one or more fl ipcharts; pens; pencils; markers; masking tape; etc)
Toys, etc to create the learning environment
NOTE: This session assumes that the participants have, at minimum, participated in ‘Let’s Think’ previously.
DISTRIBUTE the following to participants one to two weeks before the workshop
Any logistical information on timing, venue, start times etc
Pre-course reading:
— The Business of Thinking®: Team Think—Team Power™.
NOTE: Individual Profi les and debrief sessions need to have been completed prior to scheduling this session.
REVIEW the content of the following material
Article: The Business of Thinking®: Team Think—Team Power™.
This facilitator guide
Individual Participant HBDI® Profi les
Team Profi le package for the group
PREPARE the following
Seating arrangements according to the participants profi les
Room layout—U-shaped
Facility arrangements, A/V equipment and miscellaneous materials
Agenda including breaks
© Herrmann Global 2017
24
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
24
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes
Flip Charts
Unit 1 Welcome
Agenda
Parking lot
Welcometo
Team Think
Agenda / Timings
Parking Lot
© Herrmann Global 2017
25
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
25
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesIcon Legend
Facilitator-Led Discussion
Text written in BOLD CAPS are actual doing instructions—eg EXPLAIN, TELL.
Text written in bold italics is actual speech you may wish to use verbatim.
© Herrmann Global 2017
26
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
26
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesUnit Description/Learning Objectives
NOTE This module must be facilitated by an HBDI® Certifi ed Practitioner. The reports cannot be properly interpreted without an understanding of brain dominance.
The following guidelines must be adhered to for the session to achieve maximum benefi t to the group:
Use with an intact work group.
Have the entire team present, including the team leader. Without the entire team, eff ective team dynamics will not translate back in the work place.
The session should only be run once all individuals have received their own profi les and been debriefed. This is a necessary step because an individual needs to have insight into their own thinking patterns, and the principles of the Whole Brain® Model before they refl ect on the team profi le.
This session is best used with a specifi c application in mind. Because it is a shortened version of The Business of Thinking® module ThinkAbout Teams, it is designed for a focused objective rather than a general understanding. Use it when a team needs to do strategic planning, encourage innovation or has a project to complete.
It will be important to develop openness and cooperation amongst the participants
NOTE The Team Think Module is an abbreviated version of The Business of Thinking® module ThinkAbout Teams and is not intended to replace it. Rather it is designed as a specifi c debrief of an individual team’s collective thinking pattern- how the team as a whole processes information and prefers to work.
The process is a powerful consulting and facilitation tool that:
Improves communication by breaking down the barriers to eff ective listening and creating a common language for understanding individual and team dynamics
Increases productivity by increasing the brain power of the team and improving team dynamics
Encourages innovation by providing a way for breakthrough thinking and creativity through valuing diff erent thinking styles
Assists management by creating understanding of the implications of diff ering thinking styles
© Herrmann Global 2017
27
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
27
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesThe session has immediate impact on the team’s awareness of how it thinks and is a powerful catalyst for improving team eff ectiveness.
The session is particularly eff ective in the following scenarios: A newly created team which is charged with a project. In this case, early use of
the profi les will serve as a fast track way of creating eff ective team dynamics.
An existing team that wants to improve its performance. In this case, the tool can provide insight into the current dynamics of the team and improve communication and eff ectiveness.
The Team Package consists of the following profi les and charts:
Composite Profi le
Average Profi le
Rank Order of Team Profi les by Quadrant
Profi le Results and Scores
Preference Map
Work Element by Quadrant
Rank Order of Work Elements
Key Descriptors by Quadrant
Rank Order of key descriptors
Adjective Pairs Comparison
Twenty Questions Comparison
A Note on EthicsIt is important to deal with the ethics on the use of information contained in this report.
It is created solely for the use of these participants in order to help develop the effi ciency of the participants as they operate as an intact team.
All the information in this report is derived from the individual HBDI® Profi les of the participants. Since the individual information is always treated as confi dential, great care has been and needs to be taken to maintain the confi dentiality of the information of individuals. As a consequence, individual profi les in the report are represented anonymously and in random order to prevent any inappropriate inferences about particular individuals.
The leaders of the workshop guarantee that they will not share the content of this report with anyone other than the immediate participants. The participants may share the information as they deem appropriate.
The following pages of this unique leader’s guide have been split into notes that cover both ‘Right Brain’ and ‘Left Brain’ facilitation. ‘Right Brain’ facilitation notes, including section overviews, learning objectives, and examples, are highlighted in a red box. ‘Left Brain’ facilitation notes, which cover workshop process details and techniques, follow on under the red boxes.
© Herrmann Global 2017
28
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
28
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes
1. Module Introduction—10 minutes
Welcome—1 minute
WELCOME participants to the workshop and introduce yourself
SHOW Slide #1
ASK them to take their seats
ENSURE they have brought their participant material and individual HBDI® Profi le
MAKE any administrative comments required i.e breaks, toilets, messages, phone, etc.
Module Contents—1 minute
STATE the objectives
To review the Whole Brain® Model as it applies to this team in particular
To understand the implications of the Team Profi le
STRESS that applying the knowledge of maximizing the collective intelligence of the people of the team is essential for the group’s success.
ALIGN the workshop with the team’s objectives (strategy/innovation/project outcomes)
STATE how this workshop fi ts into any other work you are doing with the team, or the organization.
Parking Lot—1 minute
INTRODUCE the Parking Lot
SAY Parking Lot is actually a fl ipchart on the wall
It is to ‘park’ ideas or thoughts so we don’t forget them
Anyone can ‘park’ an idea any time
We will review them at the end of the workshop
ASK if there are any questions before you move on….
© Herrmann Global 2017
29
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
29
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesReview of Whole Brain® Model—5 minutes
REFER to the Whole Brain® Wall Chart
SAY that we should all be getting better at applying our whole brains to business issues
ASK for any examples from the group of ‘Whole Brain® Thinking’
GIVE an example yourself to encourage sharing
ASK if they remember their own HBDI® Profi le
DEAL with any questions or concerns
GIVE 2 or 3 examples yourself as needed to draw out the discussion on the relevance of the Whole Brain® Model to this group, and organizations in general.
© Herrmann Global 2017
30
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
30
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesGraphic Presentation of Composite Team Profi le
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The Group Composite Profi le is an overlay of each individual’s HBDI® Profi le on the profi le grid. This report demonstrates strengths of preference both for individuals and the group or team for each quadrant of the Whole Brain® Model. It also displays areas of lesser preference for each quadrant.
2. Composite Team Profi le—10 minutes
HANDOUT the Team Profi le to each participant
REFER participants to the fi rst few pages and EXPLAIN what the Team Pack contains
REFER participants to the Composite Team Profi le page
SHOW the slide ‘Composite Team Profi le’
Profile Scores Adjective Pairs
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 5/16
Thinkers Innovators
Organisers Database Average Humanitarians
Strong Preference
Intermediate Preference
Low Preference
A
B C
D57
64 90
90
factualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
40%Left
Mode60%
Right
Mode
49%
Upper Mode
51%
Lower Mode
TELL participants that this is a profi le which plots all the individual profi les.
EXPLAIN the rings:
The outer rings are preference or strong preference, where the individual will prefer to spend their time thinking in this quadrant
The middle ring shows an intermediate preference where an individual will be OK using that thinking style.
The inner rring shows a low preference and the individual will least prefer thinking in that quadrant.
EXPLAIN the left and right modes and scores
EXPLAIN the Upper and Lower mode scores
TRACE the profi les maps of each of the individuals—asking them to refer to their own profi les
© Herrmann Global 2017
31
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
31
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesDRAW participants’ attention to the following:
Highest and lowest scores for each quadrant
The spread of the scores in each quadrant
The clustering of preferences in each quadrant
Facilitator-led discussion:
LEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:
What to look for
What’s the range of preference within each quadrant?
Is there a broad range within the same quadrant—profi les with strong preference scores over 100 and other profi les that are in the low preference range of 10-33?
Is there a narrow range of preference within one quadrant?
In which quadrants does the team have strong or very strong preferences?
In which quadrants does it have intermediate preferences?
In which quadrants does it have low preferences?
Are there some ‘spikes’ (eg people who have a very high score)? What are the implications?
How do the upper mode and lower mode compare? What are the implications?
How do the left mode and right mode compare? What are the implications?
Here are some points to bring out during the discussion of this report when they
apply to this team:
If there is a broad range of scores within a quadrant many points of view will be represented.
A great range of preference can be an initial place to look for confl ict or stress.
Quadrants where the range of preference is narrow can be quadrants where the group experiences ‘group think’—a benefi t at times and at other times a possible hindrance. Lead a discussion on the following points.
Heterogeneity is often a gauge of the potential breadth of thinking of a group/team as they face diff erent situations and challenges.
© Herrmann Global 2017
32
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
32
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesGraphic Presentation of Average Profi le
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The solid black line diagram shows the overall group/team preferences for each quadrant. The dotted line diagram shows the adjective pairs scores for each quadrant. The adjective pairs scores show how an individual or team operates under pressure. The group average is developed by calculating the average of each of the quadrant scores (adding each individual’s score in a quadrant, and then dividing the total for that quadrant by the number of participants). Each quadrant average score is plotted on the HBDI® Profi le grid. The average profi le can highlight the degree of similarity and/or diff erence between each of the four quadrants that may translate into a signifi cant preference for one versus a low preference for another. This display charts preferences for the quadrants by mapping the data in the primary preference (>66), secondary/intermediate preference (34-66) or lower preference zones (0-33)
3. Average Team Profi le—10 minutes
REFER participants to the Average Team Profi le page
SHOW the slide ‘Average Team Profi le’
Graphic Presentation of Average Profile
Profile Scores Adjective Pairs
Thinkers Innovators
Strong Preference
Intermediate Preference
Low Preference
A
B C
D57
64 90
90
factualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
40%Left
Mode60%
Right
Mode
49%
Upper Mode
51%
Lower Mode
EXPLAIN the average ABCD scores
DRAW OUT the conclusions for this team
EXPLAIN the database average: the average for all people in the world would be 1 1 1 1. However, when smaller numbers of people are averaged (i.e. this team) the graph will show a skew refl ecting the strength of the various profi les.
EXPLAIN the various profi les in each corner:
Thinkers: this is an average profi le of all the people with strong A quadrant preferences
Organizers: this is an average profi le of all the people with strong B quadrant preferences
Humanitarians: this is an average profi le of all the people with strong C quadrant preferences
Innovators: this is an average profi le of all the people with strong D quadrant preferences
© Herrmann Global 2017
33
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
33
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesFacilitator-Led discussion:
LEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:What to look for
Is there a distinct tilt toward one or more quadrants? What are the implications?
Is there a diff erence of more than 20 points between any two quadrants?
Which are the most preferred quadrants? Least preferred?
What are the implications of that?
Is the profi le ‘balanced’ with scores in all quadrants within 6-8 points of each other?
If this is a ‘balanced’ profi le, are the scores the result of most team members having similar scores or the result of a wide range of scores that average out more in the middle?
How does the normal tilt compare with the adjective pairs (under stress) tilt?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team
Diff erences of more that 20 points between quadrants can be signifi cant.
Diff erences of degree of preference across the diagonal axis (A vs. C or B vs. D) can indicate exaggerated tilts toward the quadrant of preference and possible gaps in the quadrant of low preference. When a strong preference is juxtaposed to a low preference on the diagonal, verify if the average score in the quadrant of strong preference is made up of similar scores or the result of a wide range of scores that average out more in the middle? When it is the result of similar scores, this indicates a potential ‘blind spot’ of strong preference and potentially low preference in the opposing quadrant.
A very ‘balanced’ average profi le should be explored in conjunction with the Graphic Composite Profi le. The average can be easily misinterpreted if it is read without taking into consideration the nature of the profi les or the number of participants. For example, an average of 2 people with opposing profi les will display a balanced profi le. A balanced profi le could also be obtained by averaging two similar multi-dominant profi les.
Homogeneous teams that are comprised of mostly balanced profi les will often experience good ‘coverage’ of styles across the model, with eff ective communication but also may represent a lack of specialized thinking where it may be needed.
More heterogeneous teams comprised of very diff erent profi les will have the opportunity to benefi t from the broader spectrum of specialized thinking preferences but may suff er from some miscommunication between team members.
© Herrmann Global 2017
34
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
34
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesRank Order of Team Preferences by Quadrant
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
This display shows the rank order of overall preferences for the group team, in descending order of preference from most to least. This often refl ects the direction of the group’s thinking in their day-to-day work process (not in times of stress).
4. Rank Order of Team Preferences by Quadrant—10 minutes
REFER participants to the Rank Order of Team Preference by Quadrant page
SHOW the slide ‘Team Preferences’
Rank Order of Team Preferences byQuadrant
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 6/16
The rank order of preferences of this team as a whole:
D Upper Right 90
C Lower Right 90
B Lower Left 64
A Upper Left 57
EXPLAIN that the slide shows the rank preferences of the average preferences from the previous average slide
EXPLAIN that the rank order shows the sequence in which the group accesses each of the quadrants
EXPLAIN how the diff erence between the quadrants aff ects the fl ow of preferences. Most teams will run out of time before they get to the last quadrant, because they have spent too much time on their preferred quadrant activities. The higher the diff erence between the quadrant scores, the more likely they will get stuck in the higher of the two quadrants.
Facilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:
What to look for
What do these preferences suggest about how the team may approach its work or spend its time? What problems might that create for a team?
How does that match up with your experience of the team?
How does this refl ect or impact the priorities of the team?
© Herrmann Global 2017
35
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
35
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes What is the work-fl ow process of your group? Which quadrant does it often start
with? Why? What next? Etc.
What are the implications for your eff ectiveness? Are there areas you never ‘get to’ or that create problems for the group? How might you better address those? Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this team:
The group can appoint a person on the team to be the ‘watchdog’ for the quadrant that is least preferred. For a group whose Rank Order of Preferences displays a strong preference for A and a lesser preference for the C quadrant for example, they may appoint the person with the strongest preference in C to be their watchdog or ‘internal consultant’. For each action point they could then check in with their ‘advisor’ for feedback. To make sure they are not overlooking that quadrant.
Often when groups gather for a meeting they begin where they are most comfortable and end the meeting before they get to areas where they are less comfortable. This is true of thinking preferences as well. The Rank Order of Preferences report will confi rm for many where their tasks and topics originate due to the strongest preferences and areas they never ‘get around to’ due to the group’s lack of preference. For example, a group whose strongest preferences are in the D Quadrant may spend their hour meeting brainstorming and then leave with no action plan because the B quadrant is their least preferred. The Rank Order of Preferences Report can bring this to light for the group without placing blame.
© Herrmann Global 2017
36
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
36
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesProcess Flow of Preferences
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
This top display shows the fl ow of preferences from most preferred to least preferred. The lower graphic uses the Adjective Pairs data to show the fl ow of preferences when the team is under pressure. The two preference fl ows may be diff erent. Next to each quadrant are found the percentage of the total that each quadrant represents.
5. Process Flow of Preferences—10 minutes
REFER participants to the Process Flow of Preferences page
SHOW the slide ‘Process Flow of Preferences’
EXPLAIN that the slide shows the fl ow of preferences from one quadrant to another
EXPLAIN that the top diagram shows the fl ow of preferences based on the profi le average. The bottom diagram shows the fl ow of preferences based on the adjective pairs
EXPLAIN the percentage fi gures indicate the percentage score for each quadrant—and indicated the relative importance of each quadrant
Facilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:
What to look for
Is there a quadrant the team is likely to skip due to low preference?
How does the normal fl ow compare with the fl ow under pressure (eg Adjective Pairs)?
Where does this team go under pressure?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team
Small diff erences between quadrants will not signifi cantly impact the fl ow of work or the priorities of the team.
© Herrmann Global 2017
37
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
37
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes Big diff erences of 12 points or more will see an impact on the fl ow of the work
and where priorities fall.
The Rank Order of Preferences by Quadrant is an excellent report to show a team how they can use this team data.
— For example, a group whose strongest preferences are in the D Quadrant may spend an hour meeting doing brainstorming and then leave with no action plan because the B quadrant is their least preferred. To make sure that the team leaves with action items, it can agree to allow 10 minutes at the end of each meeting to develop an action plan.
— For a group whose Rank Order of Preferences displays a strong preference for A and a lesser preference for the C quadrant, they may appoint the person with the strongest preference in C to be their ‘internal consultant’. For each action point they could then check in with their ‘advisor’ for feedback eff ectiveness with this data in mind. For the example group above, they may decide that no matter how many great ideas they have in a meeting, at 10 minutes before the meeting’s end they will draw up an action plan.
© Herrmann Global 2017
38
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
38
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesProfi le Results: List of Scores
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
This detailed list provides comprehensive profi le information in numeric form, listing the A, B, C, and D scores for each participant. This list is organized by quadrant preference, going from most left to most right scores in the Whole Brain® Model. See HBDI® Team Profi le Participants for the list of participants by number. The group has a list. Participants can usually fi nd their profi le in the list.
Each person’s quadrant scores are displayed as well as the total score for each quadrant, the average score and standard deviation. In addition, the Median (eg an equal number of scores are above and below), Minimum, Maximum scores and the Range of scores for each quadrant are also calculated.
6. Profi le Results: List of Scores—10 minutes
REFER participants to the Tabulated Scores page
SHOW the slide ’tabulated scores’
Profile Results: List of Scores
Upper Left Lower Left Lower Right Upper Right Intro/Extro
Profile 5 87 63 78 56 7/9
Profile 6 48 90 75 81 7/9
Profile 7 24 50 137 98 7/9
Profile 1 29 68 135 65 2/9
Profile 13 51 75 98 66 8/9
Profile 9 69 90 92 45 4/9
Profile 4 66 77 92 71 5/9
Profile 11 30 35 98 150 6/9
Profile 10 48 57 83 128 3/9
Profile 2 78 35 57 126 7/9
Profile 3 74 65 69 96 7/9
Profile 8 54 75 75 95 8/9
Profile 12 78 53 80 92 7/9
Sum 736 833 1169 1169 78Average 57 64 90 90 6Min 24 35 57 45 2Max 87 90 137 150 8Std. dev. 19.8 17.2 22.6 29.5 1.8Med. 54 65 83 92 7Range 63 55 80 105 6
EXPLAIN that the table shows the previous graphical representations as a numerical table.
EXPLAIN that the top table lists the scores of each individual.
EXPLAIN that the bottom half shows the following scores:
Total—these are the sum of the individual scores for each quadrant
Average—these are the totals divided by the number of individuals in the group
Minimum—this is the lowest individual quadrant score.
Maximum—this is the highest individual quadrant score
© Herrmann Global 2017
39
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
39
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesFacilitator-led discussionLEAD a discussion on the following points:
What to look for
What’s the range in each quadrant? Wide or narrow?
Where are the scores above 100? In each quadrant? In several quadrants?
Are there any very strong preference scores (eg over 133)?
Are there any scores below 33?
What, if any, problems might occur because of the ranges?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team
Scores above 100 represent very strong preferences that are often very visible to others. They frequently have a strong impact on group process.
Scores below 33 will also have an impact on group process by their absence of preference.
A big range may indicate very diff erent, contrasting viewpoints within the group.
A small range often indicates an area where the group shares that level of preference, whatever that might be; low, intermediate, or high. That homogeneity of preference for that quadrant often provides a ‘shared space’ for the group.
— If that shared space is in an area of high preference then the outcome may be a ‘tribal-like’ sharing of viewpoints and perspectives.
— If the homogeneity falls into an intermediate preference, then there is most likely a comfort zone for the group as a whole in that mode, but no passion or highly specialized preferences in that quadrant.
— If the small range falls into a low preference zone, then the group may collectively lack energy for that approach and could overlook important aspects of a problem or situation relating to that quadrant.
© Herrmann Global 2017
40
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
40
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesPreference Map
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The Preference Map is a very powerful visual display that indicates the ‘preference tilt’ of each participant. Each person’s profi le is miniaturized and placed on the map based on its degree of preference; the more whole brained a profi le (1111, 1112, 2111, 1211, 1121, 1212, 2121) is, the closer to the center of the grid it appears. As profi les are placed away from the center toward the A, B, C, or D positions, the degree of ‘tilt’ for those quadrants increases. When profi les are placed toward the Left, Right, Upper and Lower positions, the preferences for those modes are stronger.
This shows how each individual profi le is similar to or diff erent from the position of the other profi les on the team. This helps show how heterogeneous or homogeneous the team is.
‘Mini-tribes’ or clusters of similar preference are easily identifi ed. If two or more profi les are in close proximity on the map, those individuals will often demonstrate similar thinking preferences—perhaps even ‘group think’. Profi les that are a great distance apart will display very diff ering preferences.
7. Preference Map—10 minutes
REFER participants to the Preference Map page
SHOW the slide ‘Preference Map’
A
B C
Dfactualquantitativecriticalrationalmathematicallogicalanalytical
imaginativeartistic
intuitiveholistic
synthesisersimultaneous
spatial
readerspeakerdominantdetailedsequentialcontrolledconservative
readertalker
intuitivesymbolicspiritualmusical
emotional
Introvert Extrovert
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1011
12
13
EXPLAIN that each numbered circle shows each individual plotted on the map. They will see that each circle shows their own graph inside it.
DISCUSS the implications of the spread of the profi les:
Facilitator-led discussionLEAD a discussion on the following points:
What to look for
Are there clusters (or mini-tribes)? What are the implications?
Where is the natural pull on this team (eg right, left, upper, lower)?
© Herrmann Global 2017
41
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
41
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes Are there loners (profi les that are alone/separate from the other profi les on the
map)?
What are the implications of this distribution?
As a facilitator, what are the dynamics in the room likely to be? How will you interact with the group (eg Are you a loner?)
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team
Individuals who are part of the team/group but have diff erent preferences from others may feel this ‘separateness’ during group interactions.
Those who are more multi- dominant and balanced are found in the center of this grid.
Those who are more cognitive and intellectual are more toward the upper position.
Those who are more grounded and instinctual are more toward the lower position.
Those who are more pragmatic and realistic are toward the left position.
Those who are more intuitive and open are toward the right position.
There also can be profi les that are more singular in preference. Those will be positioned more toward the A, B, C and D letters found around the grid.
Word of Caution
Some individuals will relish being a ‘loner’, while others may be uncomfortable with it. This person’s data will most likely be ‘obvious’ to the others in the group. So in fact you will be disclosing confi dential data if you share the preference map with the group, who will recognize the loner. If you have a ‘loner’, be sure to disclose this report to the individual before sharing it with the group to verify they are comfortable with your approach. It’s better to be safe than sorry when it comes to revealing confi dential data.
When you have carefully staged your presentation of individual data, more often than not, individuals will feel proud of their HBDI® Profi le, no matter where their data falls on the Preference Map.
© Herrmann Global 2017
42
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
42
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesPreference Map/Adjective Pairs
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
This report shows two views of the Preference Map. The upper map shows team member preferences when they are not under stress. The lower map shows the team members preferences when they are under stress.
8. Preference Map Scores/Adjective Pairs—10 minutes
REFER participant to Preference Map Scores/Adjective Pairspage
SHOW the slide ‘Preference Map Scores/Adjective Pairs’
EXPLAIN that the page shows 2 views of the data. The top one is based on the profi le scores, the bottom one is based on the adjective pair scores
EXPLAIN that this shows how the team may behave under stress
Facilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion on the following points:What to look for
What, if anything, happens to this team under stress?
Where are the clusters or mini tribes when the team is under stress?
Where are the loners when the team is under stress?
What are the implications of the diff erences between the team under stress and the team when it isn’t under stress?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team
The profi les on the adjective pair preference map often seem to ‘explode outward’ in comparison to the regular preference map. You can explain this by reminding participants that under stress, profi les often shift toward quadrants of stronger preference, which can accentuate the diff erences between profi les.
If the two preference maps are similar, that may indicate that there is very little shift under stress. However, there is still an opportunity to discuss with the group what impact stress has on their productivity, team dynamics or other
© Herrmann Global 2017
43
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
43
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesWork Elements by Quadrant
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The Work Elements section of the HBDI® Assessment Form asks the individual to rank Work Elements from 1 to 5: ‘5’ being work they do best and ‘1’ being work they do least well. This report presents the data individually. Each bar represents the response for one individual (the position of the bar for each person is consistent in all of the graphs). The bars are clustered by quadrant for ‘at-a-glance’ group understanding. Close inspection reveals the areas each individual reported does his or her ‘best work’, as well as the work that individual reported doing ‘least well’. This can give you a new perspective on individual data. For example, one individual’s bar may show ‘5’s’ in all four A Quadrant Work Elements and ‘1’s’ or ‘2’s’ in the C Quadrant Work Elements.
9. Work Elements by Quadrant—10 minutes
REFER participant to Work Elements by Quadrant page
SHOW the slide ‘Work Elements by Quadrant’
Work Elements by Quadrant
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 11/16
1
2
3
4
5
analytical
1
2
3
4
5
technical
1
2
3
4
5
integration
1
2
3
4
5
conceptualising
1
2
3
4
5
problem solving
1
2
3
4
5
financial
1
2
3
4
5
creative
1
2
3
4
5
innovating
1
2
3
4
5
organisation
1
2
3
4
5
planning
1
2
3
4
5
teaching
1
2
3
4
5
writing
1
2
3
4
5
administrative
1
2
3
4
5
implementation
1
2
3
4
5
expressing
1
2
3
4
5
interpersonal
A D
B C
EXPLAIN how the histograms are constructed:
The vertical axis shows the score out of 5
The horizontal axis shows the individuals
The work elements are those that were in the questionnaire
The scores are those they each nominated for each element.
EXPLAIN how this representation gives a snapshot view of:
The type of work that will motivate or de-motivate the team.
Where there are low scores in the group, it indicates that as a whole they will not do these elements well, if at all.
The spread of preferences in the group.
Where there are individuals that show high scores compared to the others for that work element, the group may wish to divide the tasks up according to individual’s level of motivation towards that element.
© Herrmann Global 2017
44
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
44
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesSpecifi cally DRAW THE ATTENTION of the group to:
How each individual’s scores vary between all the work elements?
The scores of each element within each quadrant.
Any quadrants’ relative weakness, which may have individual elements which are strong.
Quadrants of relative strength which are weak in a particular element.
Facilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion on the following points:
What to look for
Is there at least one 5 on each Work Element?
Are there Work Elements that have mostly 1’s? What are the implications?
Are there any Work Elements where the group is divided between extreme preference and a lack of preference?
What are the implications?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team
A score of 3 can be misleading because sometimes people rate an element a 3 because they have run out of ‘4’s’ and ‘5’s’. Therefore some 3’s actually represent areas of strength.
The sequence of the bars representing the scores for each element is in the same order for each element cross all four
© Herrmann Global 2017
45
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
45
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesRank Order of Work Elements
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
By averaging and rank ordering the rating of each Work Element, you will be able to immediately recognize the strengths of the group. You will also readily recognize areas of lesser preference.
10. Rank Order of Work Elements—10 minutes
REFER participants to Work Elements by Rank Order
SHOW the slide ‘Work Elements by Rank Order’
Rank Order of Work Elements
HBDI™ Team Profile - © 2007 The Ned Herrmann Group, Inc. - Herrmann Sample Team Pack Page 12/16
technical
financial
administrative
planning
organisation
creative
innovating
implementation
conceptualising
analytical
writing
integration
expressing
problem solving
teaching
interpersonal
1 2 3 4 5Averages
EXPLAIN how the histogram is constructed:
The vertical axis shows the list of elements from most to least nominated
The horizontal axis shows the group preference for that element
The work elements are those that were in the questionnaire
EXPLAIN how this representation gives a snapshot view of:
The type of work that will most motivate or de-motivate the team
The lower the element, the less that as a whole team they will do these elements well, if at all.
The distribution of the elements from the same quadrant. The colors of the bars gives a quick visual means of seeing the distribution of the group’s element preferences—in some cases it may be that the entire group demonstrates low preferences for certain elements
Specifi cally DRAW THE ATTENTION of the group to:
The most frequently selected elements
The least frequently selected elements
How elements from the same quadrant are distributed
© Herrmann Global 2017
46
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
46
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesFacilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion on the following points:
What to look for
Which work elements are rated the strongest?
Which are rated the weakest?
Which quadrants have the strongest preferences?
Which quadrants have the lowest preferences?
What are the implications?
How do the preferred work elements align with the team’s tasks?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team:
Just because a work element shows up in the middle doesn’t mean that the team is only moderately competent. Several team members may have rated those elements with ‘3’s because they ran out of ‘4’s’ and ‘5’s’.
Keep the Work Elements in mind to compare with the Key Descriptors.
© Herrmann Global 2017
47
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
47
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesKey Descriptors by Quadrant
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
In this report each bar displays the percentage of the group that chose each of the 28 Key Descriptors. Individuals choose eight Descriptors that best describe them and then identify one of the eight as the most descriptive. The bar chart also displays the percentage of the group that has descriptors chosen as “most” descriptive. In contrast to the Work Elements, the Key Descriptors refl ect individuals’ more “general” description of themselves.
11. Key Descriptors by Quadrant—10 minutes
REFER participants to Key Descriptors by Quadrant page
SHOW the slide ‘Key Descriptor by Quadrant’
EXPLAIN how the histograms are derived: It simply shows the % of people in the group or team that selected that key
descriptor
Draw the team’s attention to:
Comparisons between individual Key Descriptors compared to others in the same quadrant
Individual Key Descriptors compared to all others
Specifi c quadrants compared to other quadrants: is there a stronger pattern in any one quadrant than the others?
Weak preference within a strongly-preferred quadrant and vice versa.
Facilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion on the following points:
What to look for
What’s the distribution by quadrant?
Which quadrants have the most?
Which quadrants have the least?
Which Key Descriptors were identifi ed as most descriptive? How can those impact a team or work group?
© Herrmann Global 2017
48
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
48
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes How do the Key Descriptors compare with the Work Elements? Are there areas
where participants have identifi ed preferences in their Key Descriptors that are not refl ected in the Work Elements?
Are there quadrants that are consistently strongly preferred in both Work Elements and Key Descriptors?
Are there quadrants that are consistently least preferred in both Work Elements and Key Descriptors?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team
The size of the group will be a factor in the percentages. For example, a group with only four members could have just one person choose a certain Key Descriptor as ’most descriptive’ and that would show up as 25% preference.
There can be diff erences between the Key Descriptors and the Work Elements because sometimes people have preferences that they are not able to satisfy through work. The Key Descriptors may refl ect preferences that are being satisfi ed through hobbies and other non-work activities. For example, Imaginative and Artistic may be selected in the Key Descriptors section, while Creative and Innovative in the Work Elements section may ranked with low numbers (1-3, work done least well). This could imply that creative aspects are pursued outside of work, or that a training gap or cultural issues could prevent the individual from being creative and innovative on the job.
The Key Descriptors may also refl ect preferences that team members would like to satisfy through work, especially if they aren’t able to meet those needs through non-work related activities.
© Herrmann Global 2017
49
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
49
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
Notes
Rank Order of Key Descriptors
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The rank ordering of Key Descriptors shows which descriptors were selected more than others and which descriptors were not selected at all. The bars are color coded by quadrant for easy identifi cation.
12. Rank Order of Key Descriptors—10 minutes
REFER participants to Rank Order of Key Descriptors page
SHOW the slide ‘Rank Order of Key Descriptors’
EXPLAIN how the histograms are derived: The vertical axis shows the list of key descriptors from most to least nominated
The horizontal axis shows the group preference for that element
EXPLAIN how this representation gives a snapshot view of: Which key descriptors are rated the strongest?
Which are rated the weakest?
Which quadrants have the strongest preferences?
Which quadrants have the lowest preferences?
What are the implications?
How do the preferred work elements align with the team’s tasks?
Facilitator-led discussionLEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:
What to look for
What are the top 5 Key Descriptors? Are they from one or two quadrants or distributed among all four?
What the bottom 5 Key Descriptors? Are they from one or two quadrants or distributed among all four?
How do the Key Descriptors compare with the Work Elements in terms of distribution by quadrant?
© Herrmann Global 2017
50
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
50
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesAdjective Pair Comparison
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The Adjective Pair comparison shows which adjective pair was selected by the group.
13. Adjective Pair Comparison—10 minutes
REFER participants to Adjective Pair Comparison page
SHOW the slide ‘Adjective Pair Comparison’’
EXPLAIN that the bars are color coded by quadrant for easy identifi cation. The % fi gures along the bottom of the chart show how many of the team selected each adjective.
EXPLAIN that the report shows how the team answered each of the adjective pair questions
Facilitator-led discussion
LEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:
What to look for
Which adjective pairs did the majority of the team select?
Which adjective pairs did the team avoid?
Which of those selections might be signifi cant?
Where are the areas of potential confl ict? Which Adjective Pairs are likely to be an issue for a team?
What is the context in which the team is working and what impact will their selection have?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team:
Adjectives that the majority of the team select and the implications
Adjectives which have been equally selected and the implications
The Adjective Pairs refl ect how the group may think under pressure
© Herrmann Global 2017
51
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
51
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesTwenty Question Comparison
Segment Overview/Description and Learning Objectives
The Twenty Question comparison shows how the group answered each question.
The % fi gures along the top of each question indicate the % of the team that
made that particular selection. For example, if there is a fi gure of 5% at the
‘strongly agree’ end, that indicates that 5% of the group selected ‘strongly agree’.
The % fi gures in brackets indicate the total % of the group that selected either
‘agree or strongly agree’ as opposed to ‘disagree or strongly disagree’
14. Twenty Question Comparison—10 minutes
REFER participants to Twenty Question Comparison page.
SHOW the slide ‘Twenty Question Comparison’’
EXPLAIN that the report shows how the team answered each of the twenty questions
Facilitator-led discussion:
LEAD a discussion by posing the following questions:
What to look for
Which questions did the majority of the team agree with?
Which questions did the majority of the team disagree with?
Which of those selections might be signifi cant?
Which questions are more signifi cant than others?
Which questions are not so important?
What is the context in which the team is working and what impact will their selection have?
Points to bring out during the discussion of this report if they apply to this
team:
Those questions where the team strongly agree with or disagree
Those questions where the team does not mind.
© Herrmann Global 2017
52
The HBDI® Team Profi le
Notes
52
The HBDI® Team Profi le Debrief
NotesConclusions
Once you’ve analyzed the Team Profi le, you have a good idea of the key points you’d like to bring out from the diff erent reports.
Be ready for the individuals who want to breeze right through the reports, while there are others who want to ‘dig-in’ to the data. Try to fi nd a balance that works for the whole group. While the HBDI® Team Profi le reveals a tremendous amount of data, it does not prescribe remedies for team or group challenges. It starts the team on the path to discovering why there are challenges and how the team can move forward.
© Herrmann Global 2017
© Herrmann Global 2017
FOLLOW US:
Phone: 1-828-625-9153 or 1-800-432-4234 www.herrmannsolutions.com
CLIENTSHerrmann International clients, for whom better thinking has become integral to their business culture, include: