The trick to managing people lies in defining them in terms of their behaviour, their
relationships and social or group culture. How do these elements help us to understand people better? "We're really looking here at understanding a person by looking at how they are processing information," Bruce clarifies. "How they do so, gives you an insight into their character and their approach and from this, you are able to build up a profile, along with predicting (new) or describing (existing) relationships and cultures. If you look at the individual profile elements, you are really looking at how people process information in terms of inputs and outputs.

How is this best extracted? Through a questionnaire and a feedback session and as you begin to work with these people, you start to put a picture together, much like a puzzle, in
terms of where they stand themselves and in relation to others".

Well, what happens when Peter and Jack can't seem to work together? What do you
do with this situation? According to Bruce, you will already know that in advance. "If
you have no choice about the pairing up of these people in projects or departments,
then this approach is a great way to set expectations and help them work better together," he explains. The profiling of people in terms of behaviour and relationships takes place via a questionnaire and a feedback sessions while workshops are a great place to go through documentation and relevant material in more depth. In the process, you begin to capture patterns of what's working and what's not working for them.

I argue that this offer of a predictive system for dealing with inherent intangibility and
with the complexity of human behaviour is at most, generous and optimistic; that we can't really see what it is that allows for the nature and types of relationships and behaviours to be predicted so easily. Bruce sees a different perspective - that we can indeed predict, that there is a system and a methodology within which we can make this happen. It's not certainty for sure but it's this ability to predict that allows for the introduction of foresight. "By understanding how people process information, you have a dynamic way o f dealing with it. Inputs and outputs create a systematic model which then leads to predictions," he argues.It's important to note however, that this process doesn't help you identify whether Peter has the financial experience and background for a particular job specification, neither will it attempt to describe contextual factors. That said, the process does help you identify optimal relationships and best cultural fit, for example.

You could question the risk level involved however. The risk of inaccurate assessments as a result of your desire to, what some would say, pigeon-hole people.

Are people truly predictable? Well, we can lower the risk of inaccuracy by involving
more human interaction. Take a questionnaire for example. You pass a prospective applicant a written questionnaire and you rely on those answers exclusively. But if you do the questionnaire and then follow up in person with a Q&A, you have the chance to clarify. Arguably, the best way to strengthen this approach is falsifiability.

You do this over and over and over. Prove, test and repeat. Results prove the theory
and as a result, more value is placed on both approach and results. It builds from
there, layer upon layer. In the workplace, this poses so much more value than theoretical
positioning if only for the fact that execution in context brings results which you can
assess and then use to help enhance your next decision.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bruce Lewin works with major companies to help enhance the relationship between HR
and the business. He also authors the Four Groups' blog, http://www.fourgroups.com.