When I started researching my Graphology in Recruitment – write or wrong? blog I contacted the British Institute of Graphology to ask if they’d like to give me some feedback on my writing. The Chairman suggested that the way graphology is often used is to pre-screen candidates against a specific role so, he asked me to write directions to my local shop (on an A4 plain sheet of paper) and pop it in the post for him and some of his colleagues to assess against the fictitious role of a Manager of a Prince of Wales charity. The role was my idea by the way. This is what I sent off:
The report came back in two parts. One which gave an overview of my personality and a second which scored me out of 10 in areas relating to the “job” I was applying for. I’m going to share this so you can see the type of feedback which may be typical of a handwriting analysis.
Working with Prince Charles (6/10)
The candidate is an educated person, who may well have studied some field in the arts; she strongly indicates respect for cultural and literary pursuits. Her interests, therefore, are likely to be in line with Prince Charles‘s. When Prince Charles’s published writing is analysed, however, it is clear that he is not only a driven person but is also very sensitive about what people think of him. This candidate also has a strong personality. She is not used to giving way on matters of principle, so there are likely to be problems working with a man, such as Prince Charles, who is also not used to conceding on matters of principle.
Leadership (7/10)
She would be a strong boss, politely assertive, capable of leading a team.
Acceptance of responsibility (7/10)
Some difficulties are shown in accepting blame, so the candidate may wish occasionally to avoid taking responsibility in situations where her image is likely to be adversely affected.
Planning and organisation (7/10)
Her goals are practical and realistic, but she shows a tendency to take on too much.
Imagination (7/10)
She will not spend time daydreaming; she has a wide ranging vision.
Judgement (8/10)
Comprehension, judgement and reasoning ability are good.
Tenacity of purpose (8/10)
She is results orientated and will show persistence in completing jobs.
Self reliance (9/10)
Although, she may have occasional lapses, most of the time she feels she can cope with any situation.
Enthusiasm and energy (8/10)
She is an optimistic and enthusiastic person with considerable vitality.
Empathy (7/10)
She is an expressive person who wants to be listened to, but she has a fundamental respect for people and so will respond openly to their needs.
Conclusion
This candidate should be invited for interview.
I won’t go into detail about individual elements of this analysis but I will say that broadly speaking it’s more accurate than false. However, the very first bit sentences (The candidate is an educated person, who may well have studied some field in the arts; she strongly indicates respect for cultural and literary pursuits. Her interests, therefore, are likely to be in line with Prince Charles‘s) are absolutely incorrect!
In my overall personality analysis there is again varying accuracy (based only on my opinion of my own personality of course!). I did love this one sentence which I think does rather sum me up: She is not happy being told what to do and, therefore, needs a job which will allow her a high degree of autonomy, and to be in charge, no matter what the task. Did they secretly contact my poor husband to ascertain that?!
To be honest, I’m not sure that there much of the accurate information in the report that couldn’t be extrapolated from reading my LinkedIn profile, checking out my history of tweets and looking at the style of my
(non-handwritten) blog posts. As I mentioned in my previous post I really wanted there to be something in the art of graphology and I enjoyed chatting with Adam at the British Institute of Graphology but again I have to
conclude that recruiters should stick to proven measures (competency based interviewing, decent psychometrics, etc) to do their job.
All comments welcome.
I notice that they scored you reasonably highly (but interestingly, not too highly) for a list of traits that most people would, by default, consider themselves to be good at.
They were probably just trying to play safe.
I think they’re a bunch of bullshit artists.
I was told to watch for that (& see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect).
Obviously it’s a tricky one with me as I am naturally excellent in most areas.
Yes Princess.