rr

In 2002 a research study was carried out at Oxford University, led by Simon Walker, involving 150 individuals.

Methodology

The PEP profile was administered to 150 individuals on different occasions between January and April 2002.. Most of the sample groups were invited to take part in a research project which would involve them completing a short questionnaire and receiving a psychological report from it. It should be noted, therefore, that this sample was not a sample of what one would call ‘seekers’ searching for personal life change. It is not anticipated that the context in which the test is taken will have any significant bearing on the results.

 

The total sample size of this study is 150, although a small number of results were invalidated by administrative problems. Of this sample, 5 main sub groups were identified by which to provide inter-profession comparison. Small sample groups are acknowledged below as statistically inconclusive. The subgroups were defined by professional or occupational activities. The first was those who indicated that the principal activity in which they were involved was caring (nursing, counselling). This included some of those in ordination training, as well as some clergy and others in secular caring professions. The second was professional project managers. The third was professional line managers. The fourth was those who indicated that their main professional activity was teaching or training. The fifth was those who indicated that leadership was their main professional activity.

Data

	TRAITS
SAMPLE GROUP	EXPANSION %	EMPATHY %	STRONG %	OUTCOME FOCUS %
CARING	31	70	34	36
TRAINING/ TEACHING	81	56	68	62
LEADERSHIP	76	34	88	62
PROJECT MANAGEMENT	91	0	19	100
LINE MANAGEMENT	100	80	40	40

Interpretation

The results provide some interesting inter-group comparisons.

 

Of the CARING group, only 31% indicated a drive toward expanding their worlds; 69% had a stronger drive to consolidate their worlds. Caring professions are about helping others feel more secure and these results suggest that a significant proportion of our sample are motivated to become carers because of their own drive to feel stable and secure. Predictably, as well, their scores for empathy are high (70%), and their scores for being outcome focus are low (36%). Carers, one would expect, would have a strong capacity to empathise and to go with the needs of those they care for rather than impose their own agenda. Carers also score low on the strong trait (34%); 66% score weak and are therefore needy of affirmation. This may indicate that these carers are meeting an emotional deficit within themselves.

 

These scores are in marked contrast to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT and TRAINING/TEACHING groups. 91% of project mangers had a drive for expansion; 100% were outcome focused. Only 19% were empathetic. However, this was only a small sample group of 9 so it is too small to draw any conclusions. But, again, these figures fit the kind of organising, implementing role of a project manager. Interesting, 91% of them scored ‘weak’, indicating a need to be needed. This combined with their evaluating traits gives them a strong drive to sort things out and fix things. Once again, the scores suggest that their work roles are driven by more fundamental personal drives.

 

By contrast, LINE MANAGERS, though again it was only a small sample group of 9, appear to have much higher levels of empathy (80%) along with a drive for expansion (100%). Only 40% are outcome focused, and hence controlling. Overall, the line manager scores fit with those who need to be more sensitive and responsive to human need and mood rather than just driving a project through to its end.

 

In the TEACHING/TRAINING group, there is predictably, a high drive for expansion (81%). Again, the need to push themselves on to new things appears to be projected onto those they seek to teach. They also have a higher drive for control, 62% being outcome focused. It is also interesting to note that 68% of teachers are ‘strong’ as opposed to ‘weak’. This is in marked contrast to the CARING or PROJECT MANAGEMENT groups in which the predominant score is weak. It appears that teachers require a high level of self-belief and assurance to project themselves and instruct others. Overall, the teachers profile appears to be that of strong, forceful, focused and empathetic engagement with others.

 

Finally, the LEADERS group, of those who are currently predominantly playing a leadership role in their occupation at present. Of this group, the number of ‘strong’ is very high- 88%, indicating that a high level of self-belief and security usually accompanies leadership. 76% had a drive for expansion which would also be predicted. 68% of this group of leaders are more presented than reserved and  66% more evaluative than empathetic. If leadership involves clear communication and direction of a team then these traits would be expected.   Interestingly, leaders did not score high for control. Overall, the leaders profile is that of secure, strong, people enabling of others, not by control or coercion. These scores would also indicate that these leaders are   not meeting their own unmet emotional needs through the activity of leadership.

Conclusions

The sample group differences are dramatic. They indicate a significant correlation between professional occupation and mental self-perception as measured by the PEP in this one-off study. These results highlight that, whilst mental self-perception many change and develop over time (as the PEP predicts and monitors),, one-off PEP measurements can provide accurate and useful predictions of outward behaviours and performance.

Larger studies will be needed to confirm population norms, though this will be complicated by the 'developing nature' of both the traits and the PEP self-report system and may take several years.

r