Executive Performance on the Rorschach Comprehensive System

Abstract

The Rorschach request for candidates for positions in the upper corporate hierarchy – the so-called executive positions – has become a usual practice since the 1960s when the most classic and complete work about executive evaluation with the Rorschach appeared. The most commonly cited traits for successful executives are: ambition and intense desire to achieve; ability to make decisions; assertiveness; practicality; ability to work efficiently in frustrating conditions; ability and desire to include others in solving problems; ability to question his/her own positions and decisions in an objective fashion; ability to express hostility with tact; ability to set realistic targets; have varied tastes; “ability to work most of the time at a dizzying pace and sometimes with the reflection and calm of a Buddhist monk” (p. 4); interest in others; ability to deal with concrete and abstract problems; ability to be cautious or bold depending on circumstances; ability to take positions; initiative; predictive capacity; security; emotional stability; honesty; integrity; dedication; objectivity and cooperation. The study involved 20 Rorschach protocols of executives, all of them employed but in competition for positions in the direction of international or multinational companies, which were assessed as part of the selection process. The results do not match the profile expected. The high frequencies of Zd < –3 given by 10 executives (50%) show a hasty attitude for analyzing facts and a tendency to draw rash and careless conclusions, which increases the risk of error in making a decision. Furthermore, 7 subjects (35%) showed a high p, which reveals a tendency to a more passive attitude, expecting that others will solve the problem, and acting according to the desires of others, which can indicate feeling uncomfortable as leaders and avoiding responsibilities. In addition, 50% of the group presented Fd responses, and in four of them (20%) the food responses were accompanied by a < p, and two of them also showed an association with T > 1, a triad indicating dependency. Concerning the AdjD, 55% of our sample presented a negative score – meaning lack of resources for coping in stress situations and little ability to confront new problems. There is a high incidence of DEPI. The presence of DEPI greater than or equal to 5 in 50% of the group is surprising in executives and directors. The CDI is also positive in 50% of the subjects, which means difficulties coping with complex social situations. The lack of relational skills can create adaptation problems, make people more vulnerable to stress, and is a precursor to secondary depression. In the group, six individuals presented values of S > 3, five showed S = 3, and none of them showed S only in the first three cards. These data reflect oppositionist tendencies and aggressiveness that is manifested in making decisions and in negativist and obstinate ways of relating to others, or the manner of seeing the world, understanding situations, and confronting the environment with feelings of rage. With the exception of the high number of responses, which denote high productivity, most of the indicators we found would not allow the prediction of professional success, especially as concerns characteristics of depression, relational deficit, and passive dependency. The fact that many among the executives examined presented rather good curriculum vitae and were, thus, sent for the assessment, is interesting.