Many people find volunteering rewarding, but motives for volunteerism are different. Some people volunteer because it makes them feel better about themselves, whereas others are motivated by the service they provide to others. Such differences in motivation may not be trivial. New research in the journal Health Psychology suggests that those who volunteer to help others rather than themselves may live longer. Research led by Dr. Sara Konrath at the University of Michigan found that people who volunteered for their own personal satisfaction had the same mortality rate four years later as people who did not volunteer at all, while volunteers with altruistic motives lived significantly longer. Data came from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study, which has followed a random sample of over 10,000 people from 1957 to the present.

Between 1992 and 2008, researchers tracked a variety of health-related factors, such as socioeconomic status, marital status, smoking, alcohol use, mental health and social support. In 2004 the participants were asked about their volunteerism over the past ten years, along with their reasons for volunteering.

Of those who volunteered for more self-oriented reasons, 4 percent had died, comparable to the death rate of non-volunteers (4.3 percent). However, of those who volunteered with a focus on helping others, the death rate was only 1.6 percent. This effect remained significant even after controlling for all the health-related variables.

While no one would argue with people who volunteer because it makes them feel better, the benefits of selflessness seem apparent. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Link to the research study.

“We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done.”                 -Henry Wadsworth Longfellow   For years we’ve reported that how others see us is just as important as how we see ourselves. In fact, we’ve emphasized that others’ opinions are more important since co-workers and others are in a better position to objectively view one’s behavior. Our research shows that people’s perceptions of their SOCIAL STYLE differ from their co-workers’ perceptions about 50% of the time, and this disconnect rises to about 66% with Versatility. Two other studies on personality confirm our findings and add unique insight into the power of others’ perceptions.

For many years researchers and practitioners have been puzzled and dismayed by the relative inability of personality measures to predict job performance. There was always a belief that personality should matter more than the research has shown. At last, a report in the Journal of Applied Psychology may provide the reason for the failure of past findings – they relied on self-report rather than others’ perceptions. In a meta-analysis (an analysis of multiple research studies), researchers found that when personality profiles were based on others’ perception, the relationship between personality and job performance was much greater than when personality profiles were based on self-perception. In fact, using just one “other” rater made a significant difference, and the effect was magnified with multiple raters.

The authors conclude that the validity of personality for predicting job performance is much greater than previously believed, but this can only be shown when personality is evaluated by others who know the person. 

A related article in the November 2010 issue of Psychological Bulletin presents the results of additional meta-analyses on observer ratings of personality. The HR Tests blog features an interesting article on the article and discusses several reasons why observer ratings out-perform self-ratings. 

SOCIAL STYLE (and Versatility) demonstrates that awareness of how others see you is a key factor in workplace success. These additional studies corroborate the value of observer input. They also show that others can judge personality, not only outward behavior, more accurately than oneself.

TRACOM’s whitepaper on the Value of Multi-Rater Profiles can be downloaded here.

The scientists at Google are known for developing complex mathematical algorithms that wade through mountains of data, resulting in pin-pointed searches. But recently a team of statisticians within Google turned their attention to uncovering something even rarer than an original copy of Freud’s The Interpretation of Dreams – effective leadership. Specifically they sought to determine what behaviors are most valued within Google, an organization that prides itself on its distinction from more mundane corporations.   The results were less than surprising. After correlating phrases, words, praises, and complaints culled from the company’s performance reviews, feedback surveys and awards nominations, they found that those qualities most valued by employees were the same things we’ve known from research in other organizations: help employees with career development, have a clear strategy, show concern for employees’ lives, and so on. These insights came after collecting more than 10,000 observations about managers and analyzing over 100 unique variables.

Although these findings might seem disappointing, on the contrary they were highly relevant and welcome within the organization, and Google has used these results to improve their leadership effectiveness. The information was taught and discussed in training programs, as well as in coaching and performance review sessions with individual employees, and it led to quick results. As only a statistician could report, the company had a statistically significant improvement in manager quality for 75 percent of its worst-performing managers.

To read more about this unique program, click here for The New York Times article.

And remember the power of SOCIAL STYLE is also available as an iPhone App. Visit the iTunes store for details on this handheld performance tool. 

For generations our educational systems have stressed academic performance, and for good reason. In order to thrive, we need to develop talented individuals who can successfully lead us into the future. By now everyone has probably heard about Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, a book by Amy Chua that describes how she raised her two daughters on a liberal regimen of academic homework and a conservative dose of play and socialization. Chua’s book has ignited passionate debate about how much emphasis should be placed on academics versus allowing kids to just be kids.   It is not my intent to criticize Ms. Chua, but perhaps between the violin and math instructions she overlooked some important lessons that can also affect her children’s chances of success – social development.In recent years there has been a renewed interest in the impact that social skills has on individuals and their well-being, and a new review of multiple studies helps to remind us of the importance that social education has for children.

A research article in the journal Child Development analyzed 33 studies and found that kids who were taught social and emotional skills had an average 11 percentile-point gain in their academic performance compared to children who did not receive such instruction. This gain was found over a six month span. The courses emphasized self-control, responsible decision-making, and how to develop and maintain positive relationships with peers and adults. The study found that these programs help kids form bonds with their teachers and may affect how attached they are to their schools. These factors are positively related with student achievement. Teacher-led programs that encouraged student involvement and role-playing were most successful.

The study’s authors indicate that this type of instruction might affect the physiology of the brain; in particular children’s executive cognitive functions that help them control their impulses and actions. As I’ve mentioned before in this blog, we don’t have the luxury of returning to grade school to start over with our social educations, but as adults we do have the wherewithal to consciously choose how to act, and eventually our brains will develop accordingly.

So if you have little cubs running around the den try to remember that the most successful tigers are those that have learned to understand and cooperate with their fellow felines.

You can read the study in Child Development here.

Email communications represent a big opportunity for confusion and miscommunication.  One study found recipients only correctly interpret emails about 50% of the time. This often leads to misunderstandings, ill will, and the disintegration of trust and connectedness – all of which, if not managed or mitigated, negatively impact relationships and ultimately erode productivity. Dr. Fairlie Firari has conducted her own research and found that SOCIAL STYLE concepts can be applied to both identify Style-related email problems and improve electronic interactions.

For this study, the content of more than 300 business emails submitted by 32 managers from a variety of organizations was analyzed. Using the TRACOM SOCIAL STYLE Profile for validation, Dr. Firari was able to accurately determine the Styles of the majority of participants. Importantly, this was not based on personal judgment; instead people's Styles were determined entirely by a computer program designed to analyze Style attributes.

Click here to read Dr. Firari’s description of her findings and suggestions for improving your own email communication
 

As a psychologist, I occasionally feel a little embarrassed about some of the research in my field. Researchers spend years, and often significant amounts of grant money, to uncover results that seem intuitive to everyone outside of the laboratory. For example, did you know that suicide rates increase with the amount of country music played on the radio? It’s true. Though at first glance some research seems like fluff, these studies often reveal information that is subtle, and therefore the results are more meaningful and useful in the real world. Take happiness, for example. It may seem self-explanatory that happier people have better experiences than unhappy people. Among other things, they’re happier! But happiness, it turns out, has a multitude of other effects that might surprise you. An article from msnbc.com highlights some of these outcomes, including greater work performance, faster promotion, and higher income.

Jessica Pryce-Jones, author of “Happiness at Work,” analyzed survey and focus group results from 3,000 people in 79 countries and found that the happiest employees are 155 percent happier with their jobs, 108 percent more engaged, and 50 percent more productive, among other impressive findings. Complementary research conducted at the University of California shows that happiness literally pays. Two benefits to a good mood include higher income and higher work quality.

Alternatively, unhappy people tend to be less creative, less able to solve problems, and spread their misery to co-workers. Research shows that emotions are literally contagious, and at the risk of stating the obvious, wouldn’t we all rather work with people who are enthusiastic and pleasant than with pessimists?

Click here to read the full MSN article.

* Editors Note:  Dr. Casey Mulqueen is TRACOM's Director of Research.  A survey of TRACOM employees found that Wednesday is the least happy day of the work week, which is the day that Dr. Mulqueen works off-site.  Additional research is required to confirm if the relationship is causal. 

You’re all familiar with the old adage that nice guys finish last. Like many common sayings that automatically roll off our tongues, it is not true. Nice people do just fine, thank you. However, as new research shows, it isn’t all good news for the considerate and honest people of the world either. In fact, we might be able to edit the proverb to read, “At the last, nice guys are finished.” A recent article by Jonah Lehrer in the Wall Street Journal (August 14-15, 2010) discusses what psychologists call the paradox of power. The same traits and characteristics that help leaders rise to power all but disappear once they’ve achieved positions of authority. Many people are surprised to learn that the vast majority of those who attain leadership roles are, in fact, not ruthless subscribers to Machiavellianism. Instead, far and above it is the people who are perceived as most considerate and sociable who become respected leaders. This makes intuitive sense, and as TRACOM knows from our own research, people give respect and support to leaders who practice high Versatility. The problem is, once these people become leaders, their good traits often fly out the corner office window.

Recent research conducted at the University of California, Berkeley, indicates that when people are given power, their behavior begins to mimic individuals with neurological damage. In particular, they act like patients who have damage to the specific brain area that is important for empathy and decision-making. Researchers point out that one of the main problems with authority is that it makes people less sympathetic to the concerns and emotions of others. For example, studies have found that people in positions of authority are more likely to rely on stereotypes and generalizations when judging others, and they spend significantly less time making direct eye contact with people who are in less powerful positions than themselves.

Of course, power doesn’t turn everyone into merciless jerks. Some leaders are able to maintain and even enhance the good qualities that brought them authority. Extensive research on leadership would indicate that self-awareness and self-monitoring are key ingredients to remaining one of the good guys. Leaders who know themselves and the impacts they have on others, and who actively, on a daily basis, pay attention to their own behavior and control themselves, are much less likely to lose their good qualities.

In past blogs we’ve talked about some of the similarities and differences between groups of people on their Style and Versatility. One finding we noticed is that many women are Amiable and Expressive (60% combined), while more men tend to be Analytical and Driving (57% combined). So this begs the question, since many women are more comfortable showing their emotions, does this make them more effective communicators? After all, we tend to describe impassioned leaders as more charismatic communicators than leaders who are less emotional in their behavior.

So at the risk of fanning the flames for a new gender war, we decided to stop pondering and let the data speak for itself. To answer our question we analyzed people’s Feedback profiles. Feedback is the component of Versatility that indicates how effectively a person communicates in one-on-one situations.

What we found is that women have higher Feedback skills than men. The difference is not overwhelming, but it is noticeable. I’m sure many of you, especially the women, are saying, “Duh, I could’ve told you that!” But it’s always nice when hard data confirms our impressions.

So what does this mean for how we communicate with others in our daily lives? Realistically, it means that we still have to approach one another as individuals, and pay attention to one another’s Styles more so than our genders. Like all statistics, the difference in Feedback between men and women is at a group level, and interpersonal skills are, well, interpersonal. So all of us, regardless of our chromosomes, should pay attention to our communication skills and keep working to improve.

A recent AP story on MSNBC discusses new research that shows that older people are wiser.  This is consisent with TRACOM's own research on age and Versatility.  Here is an excerpt and link for the MSNBC story:

For resolving conflicts, go to grandma

Social wisdom increases with age, study shows

By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID

AP Science Writer

updated 7:22 a.m. MT, Tues., April 6, 2010

WASHINGTON - It turns out grandma was right: Listen to your elders. New research indicates they are indeed wise — in knowing how to deal with conflicts and accepting life's uncertainties and change.

It isn't a question of how many facts someone knows, or being able to operate a TV remote, but rather how to handle disagreements — social wisdom.

And researchers led by Richard E. Nisbett of the University of Michigan found that older people were more likely than younger or middle-aged ones to recognize that values differ, to acknowledge uncertainties, to accept that things change over time and to acknowledge others' points of view.

"Age effects on wisdom hold at every level of social class, education, and IQ," they report in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

In modern America, older people generally don't have greater knowledge about computers and other technology, Nisbett acknowledged, "but our results do indicate that the elderly have some advantages for analysis of social problems."

"I hope our results will encourage people to assume that older people may have something to contribute for thinking about social problems," Nisbett said.

In one part of the study the researchers recruited 247 people in Michigan, divided into groups aged 25-to-40, 41-to-59 and 60 plus.

Participants were given fictitious reports about conflict between groups in a foreign country and asked what they thought the outcome would be.

For example, one of the reports said that because of the economic growth of Tajikistan, many people from Kyrgyzstan moved to that country. While Kyrgyz people tried to preserve their customs, Tajiks wanted them to assimilate fully and abandon their customs.

The responses were then rated by researchers who did not know which individual or age group a response came from. Ratings were based on things like searching for compromise, flexibility, taking others' perspective and searching for conflict resolution.

About 200 of the participants joined in a second session, and a third section was conducted using 141 scholars, psychotherapists, clergy and consulting professionals.

The study concluded that economic status, education and IQ also were significantly related to increased wisdom, but they found that "academics were no wiser than nonacademics" with similar education levels.

The full story is available at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36191339/ns/health-behavior/from/ET

English may be the international language of business, but TRACOM has found that allowing participants to learn in their native language makes training more effective.  As a result TRACOM currently offers up to 19 different language options for the SOCIAL STYLE Profile. 

International language support is available for both the initial Profile Questionnaire and the completed SOCIAL STYLE Profile Report.   Available languages include common languages such as German, French and Spanish as well as less-frequently occurring ones such as Bulgarian, Korean and Turkish.

Participants and their raters can choose any available language.  And each person can choose whichever language they prefer, independent of the language chosen by others.  So a training participant might conduct their own profile in Spanish and have others rate her in Japanese, Greek and Chinese.  The SOCIAL STYLE Profile she receives in this case would be in Spanish as that is her language choice.

In addition to offering so many language options, TRACOM offers more than 20 country and regional norms.  So a person working in Italy can be profiled against others in that country, while an Italian working in New York, can be profiled against a North American norm.   Country-specific and regional norms provide the most accurate look at a person’s SOCIAL STYLE and behavioral preferences. 

The availability of so many languages makes it easier on everyone involved and increases the reliability of the data because the questions are better understood and thus the responses more accurate.  This approach best addresses both the cultural variances of international business and the individual behavioral preferences that are the foundation of the SOCIAL STYLE Model.

Click here to learn more about international languages and norms.

And let us know about your experiences in conducting business internationally.  Have language and culture affected your work?  Comment below.