The Assessment Obsession: A Double-Edged Sword in Coaching and the Workforce

In today’s workforce, assessments have become an obsession. Companies rely on them to shape hiring decisions, evaluate team dynamics, and guide leadership development. Coaches often embrace these tools enthusiastically, seeing them as an efficient way to uncover insights about their clients. However, this fixation on assessments can sometimes do more harm than good, especially when they’re misused, overhyped, or treated as the ultimate solution to complex challenges.

Coaches and the Shiny Object Syndrome

The coaching world isn’t immune to the allure of assessments. From DISC to MBTI, CliftonStrengths to Hogan, some coaches jump from one assessment to another, chasing the next shiny tool to impress clients. This enthusiasm, while well-intentioned, can lead to a superficial reliance on assessments at the expense of deeper, individualized coaching work. Worse, coaches may conflate the purpose of different tools or fail to understand their limitations, feeding into the very obsession they should be questioning.

Misusing Assessments: A Widespread Issue

Many organizations and coaches misuse assessments beyond their intended purpose:

• Behavioral Assessments Used as Personality Indicators: Tools like DISC and Predictive Index, designed to measure work-related behaviors, are often mistakenly treated as personality tests, leading to oversimplified conclusions about individuals.

  
  

• Hiring Decisions Based on Unintended Tools: Assessments like Gallup’s CliftonStrengths, meant for development, are sometimes used to screen candidates, creating bias and risking poor hiring choices.

  
  

• Misinterpretation and Overgeneralization: Assessments can produce oversimplified labels—“introvert,” “innovator,” “collaborator”—that pigeonhole individuals instead of fostering nuanced understanding.

• 
  

Assessments: A Tool, Not a Crutch

In my opinion, assessments should be treated as tools, not crutches. They provide data points but are not a substitute for meaningful conversations, critical thinking, or tailored coaching. An effective coach uses assessments to open dialogue and guide exploration, not to create rigid definitions of who a person is or how they should operate. Similarly, companies must integrate assessment results with broader strategies and human judgment rather than relying solely on scores or labels.

Breaking Down the Types of Assessments

• Personality Assessments

  • Examples: MBTI, The Big Five, Hogan,

  • Purpose: Reveal innate preferences and traits.

  • Risks: Oversimplifying complex personalities into static categories.

• Behavioral Assessments

  • Examples: DISC, Predictive Index

  • Purpose: Identify workplace behaviors and interaction styles.

  • Risks: Misinterpreted as personality indicators or used inappropriately for hiring.

• Strengths Assessments

  • Example: Clifton Strengths.

  • Purpose: Highlight natural talents and potential strengths.

  • Risks: Overgeneralizing strengths and misapplying results beyond their intended developmental purpose.

• Emotional Intelligence Assessments

  • Example: EQ-i 2.0

  • Purpose: Measure emotional and social competencies, such as self-awareness, empathy, and relationship management, to improve interpersonal effectiveness and decision-making.

  • Risks: Misinterpreting emotional intelligence scores as fixed traits rather than skills that can be developed over time.

Conclusion

Assessments can be powerful tools when used thoughtfully and in context. However, they are just one piece of the puzzle. Coaches and companies alike must resist the temptation to over-rely on them, remembering that true growth and understanding come from nuanced conversations and holistic strategies. Let assessments guide, not define, the journey.