1

Whe

n in

divi

dual

s gro

w,

orga

nisa

tions

gro

w

When individuals grow, organisations grow

The Heartstyles Indicator

3

Whe

n in

divi

dual

s gro

w,

orga

nisa

tions

gro

w

Finding the right focus

The simple, wonderful truth is that people are immensely complex. That doesn’t mean personal growth can’t be straightforward. It just means you need a clear idea of what you’ll concentrate on and why.

That’s what the Heartstyles Indicator establishes. Our online personal development tool (available in 25 languages) references information supplied by individuals and their peers against a huge control group – allowing us to create a personal, data-driven action plan.

What do we measure?

People are changeable. Character isn’t set in stone, but changes over time. It’s obvious, sure, but most personality tests seem to ignore that. They tell people they fit X or Y profile, as if their life and working styles were immutable.

To our minds this approach barely scratches the surface. Yes, self-knowledge is great for figuring out who we are – but that information may not always help us understand why we got there or get us where we want to be.

That’s why we measure behaviours, not ‘types’. Scoring them in 16 areas, we build our participants a Personal Development Guide, outlining where and how they can take steps to become their best self and realise their goals.

Why does it matter?

Why should you care about whether your people are guided by fear or love, pride or humility? What do those philosophical ideas have to do with your bottom line?

That’s perhaps best answered with another question: if your culture drives your success, and your people drive your culture, what drives your people?

Clearly, answering that question has everything to do with growing your business. With the Heartstyles Indicator you can start collecting those answers – and not in abstract terms either…

Turning soft skills into hard numbers

In business, we love metrics. And rightly so. They let us see how things are going and how we might alter our course. But there’s an irony to our mania for metrics. We’re so used to putting our faith in numbers that things which aren’t so easily quantified can get overlooked.

We don’t think that’s right. Or necessary. Now, in just a few minutes, you can start measuring and managing behaviours – shifting them for the better.

The Heartstyles Indicator

5

Whe

n in

divi

dual

s gro

w,

orga

nisa

tions

gro

w

Inef ective behaviour

We look at 16 styles of thinking and behaving, which we categorise as being either ‘above the line’ or ‘below the line’.

The former are efective traits that will help you – and those around you – to develop. The latter are more likely to hold you back.

How do we display the results?

We use a graph like the one you see on this page. It’s divided into four quadrants; humility, love, pride and fear. As you probably guessed, the two that sit above the horizontal axis (humility and love) are the ‘above the line’ behaviours. Pride and fear sit ‘below the line’.

There’s also a divide between the left and right sides of the graph. Those to the left (humility and pride) are concerned with the participant’s relationship with themselves, whereas those to the right (love and fear) are about how they relate to others.

The bigger the bar in any one area, the more that trait is present in your current behaviours.

The first thing to say is that this is not a profiling tool. The results don’t mean you are a certain way, they simply show how you appear to be behaving at this point in time.

Using this knowledge, we can work with you to find out why this is the case and work on the areas where you want to start doing things diferently.

Of course, to do this we need to put your scores into context. For that reason, we’ll show a graph displaying your Benchmark Indicator. This illustrates what you aspire to be, based on the values you hold dear. Alongside this is the Self Score Indicator showing where you perceive yourself to be at present.

If you’ve selected a relevant package, you’ll also see an Others Score Indicator graph. This shows how selected colleagues see you (you can opt to receive input from 3, 6, 9, 12 or 15 other people).

All of these results are shown in a Personal Development Guide. Also depending on what package you have chosen you may get a Team Development Guide and a Culture Development Guide.

What do we measure?

What do the results mean?

Pers

onal

focu

s

Ef ective behaviour Others focus

The process

Benchmark Indicator

Invitation email Complete the 10 minute online survey

Get a Personal Development Guide with results

Self Score Indicator

Others Score Indicator

Above the line

Below the line

© Copyright Heart Brands IP PTY Ltd 2008-2018 All Rights Reserved

© Copyright Heart Brands IP PTY Ltd 2008-2018 All Rights Reserved

7

Whe

n in

divi

dual

s gro

w,

orga

nisa

tions

gro

w

For many of our clients it’s enough to know that our methods have been rigorously developed and academically validated. For others, it’s important to take a look under the hood and get to grips with the nuts and bolts of our process...

Heartstyles Indicator History

By understanding how we behave and why, we can start to take control of our development and begin to become our best selves. Our model is designed to help participants do just that. By asking the right questions, the Heartstyles Indicator gets to the core of what defines our personal relationships and professional efectiveness.

Based on extensive research, comprehensive reviews of psychological theories, related available measurement tools as well as qualitative construct validation from targeted sample populations in Australia, UK, South Africa and USA, the Indicator was developed by Stephen Klemich and Dr Mara Klemich (PhD).

Psychological theories research and review

The Heartstyles researchers (Stephen and Mara Klemich) began by studying known behavioural traits and then factor-analysing hundreds of measures of these traits looking for the underlying factors of thinking and behaviour.

Their research focused on the early psychoanalytic theories around personality and later ideas on the external stimuli afecting behaviour – including reviews of concepts from such theorists and researchers as Maslow (1954), Sullivan (1953), Horney (1937), McClelland (1953; 1961; 1987), Leary (1957), Rogers (1941; 1951; 1961), Laferty (1989), Seligman (1998), Bandura (1977), Goleman (1995).

From McClelland they found highly relevant ideas on how our thinking relates to our efectiveness, while Maslow and Roger’s work contributed important thoughts on what constitutes healthy thinking. Roger’s people-centric humanism was also a key influence on the Heartstyles approach.

Stack Sullivan – who put forward the idea that there are two primary sources of motivation, the pursuit of satisfaction and the pursuit of security – also helped inform the Heartstyles model. His ideas about the psychological ‘defence mechanisms’ we use to avoid anxiety (especially our tendency to avoid or oppose that which we find threatening) tallies with our researchers’ own ideas on how pride and fear inhibit efectiveness.

The Heartstyles team recognised that the use of Satisfaction versus Security needs could be attributed to a deep set of motivators based on the spiritual values of humility, love, pride and fear. The Heartstyles team hypothesised that the use of defensive and constructive constructs would be useful for individuals to develop efective behaviours that promote efective character growth and interpersonal relationships while recognising the basic motivators of humility and love or pride and fear.

Along similar lines to Sullivan, Horney (1937) developed her ‘Theory of the Self’. The Heartstyles researchers focused on her ideas on compliance, aggression and detachment in developing their approach. Other works researched include: Seligman’s ‘Learned Optimism’; Bandura’s ‘Self eficacy’; Goleman’s ‘Emotional Intelligence’ (note: Goleman was a student of McClelland).

Leary (1957) through his Interpersonal Circumplex model introduced that normal and abnormal personalities of the same type are functionally linked along a continuum, and personality styles are systematically related to one another in a circular order – an important idea for Heartstyles.

Creation of the Heartstyles 4 underlying principles and 16 constructs

After facilitating hundreds of corporate leadership programmes, in 1994 Stephen Klemich observed that people who really developed their character and efectiveness were those who had a change in their heartfelt values. From there, he and his researchers set out to develop a tool that – built around the notion that the heart defines our behaviours – could properly measure efectiveness.

The first step was to validate the hypothesis that personal efectiveness could indeed be attributed to a deep set of motivators (namely humility, love, pride and fear). The researchers developed a set of 16 constructs based on eight efective thinking styles, as well as eight inefective ones. The eight efective constructs were: authentic, transforming, reliable, achieving, relating, encouraging, developing and compassionate. The eight inefective constructs were: sarcastic, competitive, controlling, striving, approval seeking, easily ofended, dependent and avoiding.

Between 1994 and 2006 the researchers further developed the initial 16 constructs with an exhaustive list of items (approximately 650). The items were derived from phase one: literature reviews, reviews of current instruments, and observations of peoples’ behaviours.

From 2007 to 2012 there was further exhaustive item generation, validation studies, and then finally the norming of the instrument. Studying known behavioural traits and then factor-analysing hundreds of measures of these traits lead to our arrival at the 16 constructs that make up the Heartstyles Indicator as it is today.

Mara’s background as a Neuropsychologist, Clinical Psychologist, and later Organisational Psychologist assisted the research process in its first phases of model and construct development and item generation. Stephen’s extensive consulting background in leadership and culture development, and personal development programmes and initiatives assisted with the behavioural observations. These formed the basis of the model, construct development and item generation.

The Heartstyles Indicator is:

You can use it to:

Available in 25 languages

Made up of 75 carefully selected questions

Quick and easy, taking just 10 minutes to complete

Backed by facilitated learning and training

Gain a 360-degree snapshot of the way your people live and work

Take that knowledge, shift behaviours and grow

OUR TOOL AT A GLANCE

9

Whe

n in

divi

dual

s gro

w,

orga

nisa

tions

gro

w

Validity and reliability

From its inception as a concept, through to its validation, we’ve been exhaustive in ensuring the Heartstyles Indicator is robust.

The Heartstyles Indicator is based on a complex instrument that is able to pinpoint behavioural characteristics. This core instrument is supplemented by easy to read reports developed through years of experience and enhancement. The reports have purposely been written in non-judgemental, easy to understand generic terms, so people of all backgrounds can relate to the information. These reports are proprietary and available exclusively through Heartstyles.

The Heartstyles Indicator was developed from proven psychological techniques and measures that have been validated and researched. At its core, the profile is based on item-response theory that derives its initial calculations from an extensive checklist of descriptors. For the user, this procedure is completely nontechnical and does not require any specialised knowledge, with most people taking 10 to 15 minutes to complete the instrument.

The methodological thoroughness used in its development makes the Indicator reliable and valid. Central issues underpinning questionnaire development procedures are establishing reliability and validity from item generation, and the proposal of a priori factor structure to subsequent psychometric analysis. In this regard, the Heartstyles Indicator has been developed through rigorous procedures by adopting logical and structured approaches.

Extensive validity and reliability research has been performed by internal and external Ph.D. analysts, including Ph.D. statisticians and industrial organisational psychologists.

Heartstyles contracted a team of statisticians led by Prof David Anderson and Dr Namsook Jahng from the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada to conduct the multiple validation studies, and eventually the first norming study on the Heartstyles Indicator.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Cronbach’s Alpha .858 .867 .910 .912 .897 .880 .905 .935 .858 .910 .911 .929 .887 .830 .863 .881

Table 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Cronbach’s Alpha .80 .84 .84 .88 .84 .81 .80 .91 .82 .84 .88 .93 .85 .74 .81 .881

Table 2

Table 31 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Cronbach’s Alpha .740 .879 .777 .782 .769 .814 .855 .820 .861 .768 .856 .676 .855 .888 .756 .808

The Heartstyles Indicator is a comprehensive, internally consistent, and valid measure to help people identify and transform their inefective behaviours, develop behaviours that promote character growth and improve their interpersonal relationships.

The Heartstyles Indicator is a tool that has vast application and can be used with a high level of confidence that measures what it claims to measure. It’s availability in multiple languages provides global usage and appeal.

Validation studies

Phase 1: 2006

• Factor analysis of Heartstyles questionnaire

• Analyse internal consistency and determine factor structure of 600 items to reduce to 360 items

• Determine validity of 16 initial constructs

Phase 2: 2008 (Stage 1)

• Factor analysis and validation of Heartstyles questionnaire

• Analyse internal consistency and determine factor structure of 360 items – reduced to 240 items

• Determine validity of 16 constructs

See Table 1

Anderson, D. & Trey, S., (2008). Factor analysis and validation of the Heartstyles Questionnaire. Unpublished research report. Department of Curriculum Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Phase 3: 2008 (Stage 2)

• Factor analysis and heuristic validation of Heartstyles questionnaire (Stages 1&2)

• Analyse internal consistency and determine factor structure of 240 items – reduced to 92 items

• Analyse internal consistency and determine factor structure of 92 items

• One construct re-named

See Table 2

Anderson, D. & Trey, S., (2008). Factor analysis and heuristic validation of the Heartstyles Questionnaire (Stages 1&2). Unpublished research report. Department of Curriculum Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Phase 4: 2011

• Confirmatory factor analysis and re-validation of Heartstyles questionnaire (92 items)

• Analyse internal consistency and determine factor structure to become final 75 item questionnaire

See Table 3

Anderson, D. & Jahng, N., (2011). Refinement and validation of the Heartstyles Questionnaire. Unpublished research report. Department of Curriculum Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Phase 5: 2012

• First Norming of Heartstyles questionnaire (75 items)

• Create norm benchmarks for the 16 constructs for Self Report and Others Report data

• Investigation reported in the process indicated that there were multiple statistically significant diferences on the HS constructs by variables of Age and Gender

Anderson, D. & Jahng, N., (2012). Norming of the Heartstyles Questionnaire for Self and Others determinations. Unpublished research report. Department of Curriculum Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Heartstyles gives me a way to measure, very specifically, to what extent we are making progress in building and working effectively together as teams”

“Jens Hofma – CEO, Pizza Hut Restaurants UK

11

Whe

n in

divi

dual

s gro

w,

orga

nisa

tions

gro

w

Bandura, A. Self Eficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review 1977, Vol. 84, No. 2, 191-215.

Boyle, G J (1995). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some psychometric limitations. Australian Psychologist 30: 71–74.

Cattell, H. B. (1989). The 16PF: Personality In Depth. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.

Cattell, H. E. P., & Schuerger, J. M. (2003). Essentials of 16PF Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Cooke, R. A., Rousseau, D. M., Laferty, J. C.(1987). Thinking and behavioral styles: Consistency between self-descriptions and descriptions by others. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, 815-823.

Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

Goleman, D (1995). Emotional Intelligence. London, Bloomsbury Publishing.

Horney, K (1937). The Neurotic Personality of our Time. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Laferty J. C., 1983, 1986, 1987, 1989, The Life Styles Inventory. Plymouth, Michigan, USA: Human.

Synergistics. Copyright 1989 by Human Synergistics International.

Leary, T (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality: a functional theory and methodology. New York: Ronald Press Co.

Maslow, A (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper

Maslow, A (1964). Toward a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand.

McClelland, D (1953). The Achievement Motive. New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts.

McClelland, D (1961). The Achieving Society. New York, Free Press.

McClelland, D (1987). Human Motivation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

McCrae, R.R., Costa P.T.Jr., Piedmont, R.L. Folk Concepts, Natural Language, and

Psychological Constructs: The California Psychological Inventory and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality Volume 61, Issue 1, pages 1–26, March 1993.

Myers, Isabel Briggs; Mary H. McCaulley (1985). Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Rogers, C (1942). Counselling and Psychotherapy: Newer Concepts in Practice. Boston: Houghton Miflin.

Rogers, C (1951). Client Centered Therapy: its current practice, implications and Theory. Boston: Houghton Miflin.

Rogers, C (1961). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View on Psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Miflin.

Seligman, M (1998). Learned Optimism. New York, Pocket Books.

Stack Sullivan, H (1953). The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: WW Norton & Co.

References

After 15 years of working with personal development tools, I was on the verge of giving them all up, but then I was introduced to Heartstyles”

“

Ongoing research studies: 2013 to ongoing

The first investigation to separate specific norms for Age and Gender for the Heartstyles Indicator was completed in 2014.

From 2017 onwards, continuous research on correlations between scales, as well as building normative data for the English version and 24 non-english language versions has been underway.

The original validation studies focused on the following: First, criterion-related validity was verified through predictive performance studies consisting of significance correlations regression analyses along with factor analysis. Second, construct-related validity was shown by way of low construct-irrelevant variance along with intra-measure convergent and discriminant validity. Third, content-related validity evidence was demonstrated through role-based targets and appropriate weightings, ensuring that only the behavioural constructions that are deemed to be important and critical are retained and incorporated. Reliability analyses were also completed that demonstrated internal consistency through Cronbach coeficient alphas along with test-retest correlations.

For each of the scales, it was determined which indicative statements were endorsed and which contraindicative statements were endorsed. These were then used to determine a raw score for each scale, and the raw scores were individually standardised to obtain standard scores. To determine standardisation values, a normative sample of 3,000 highly diversified individuals was utilised. The first norming of the validated questionnaire was conducted in 2012 by Prof Anderson and Dr Jahng from the University of British Columbia.

2017

• Dynamic norm capability constructed into the online engine

• Created new norm benchmarks for the 16 constructs for Self Report and Others Report data

• Norm population groups: Self n= 21,673, Others n= 82,786*

The dynamic norm capability means we are continually building the data pool with an ever-increasing norm set.

Translation of the Indicator into 24 non-english languages

2016 – 2018: Indicator translation and validation process into 24 non-english languages: Arabic, Bulgarian, Dutch, French EU, French Canadian, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, Indonesian Bahasa, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Malaysian Bahasa, Mandarin, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Spanish EU, Spanish Latin American, Taiwanese (Trad Chinese), Thai, Turkish, Urdu, Vietnamese.

*correct as of August 2018

Heartstyles Accredited Associate

For further information see brochures on:

• An Introduction to Heartstyles • Become an associate

0005

Aug

201

8

© Copyright Heart Brands IP PTY Ltd 2008-2018 All Rights Reserved

United Kingdom WeWork, Suite 2B110, 2 Eastbourne Terrace, Paddington, London W2 6LG Telephone: +44 (0)20 3695 9210

Australia Suite 407, 56 Bowman Street, Pyrmont NSW 2009 Sydney, Australia Telephone: +61 400 969641

South Africa Westlake, Cape Town, South Africa Telephone: +27 78114 2808 or +27 83236 8157

Are you ready to start your journey? We’re waiting to help set you on your way. Contact us at enquiries@heartstyles.com