EMAC ASSESSMENTS, LLC
CREATE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE WITH EMAC'S LAMPE
LEADERSHIP MODEL AND OUR HALO TECHNOLOGIES.
ADVANCED HALO METHODS
The HALO system includes numerous advanced, state-of-the-art methods that incorporate the best of current research on diagnosing organizational issues. There are five methods that deserve special emphasis. These include:
There are four types of information gathered during an Holonomic Assessment of the Leadership of an Organization. These four types include:
Multiple sources of information reduce bias and add balance to any analysis.
The main idea behind the HALO methods is to provide a means for explaining the variance in responses on Customized Organizational Inquiry Items. The usual COI item has a statement such as "I'm satisfied with the management of my company." The respondents are then asked to choose the extent to which they agree with this statement. The responses are then averaged and declared a result. The problem is always the same: What does one do to improve the result? There is never a satisfactory answer available from the survey because the items are knobless. This means that (1) they ask for a judgment about a state of an undefined construct and (2) there is no causal process or variable which is seen as causing the different values. If one were to think of a simple graph, the result is plotted along a vertical axis but there is no horizontal axis to explain the results. That is, there is no "knob" one can select and turn in order to improve the result. That is why they are called knobless scales.
The beauty of HALO is that it produces a set of 53 possible horizontal or x-axis knobs to explain the variance in every COI item. The ability of a "knob" to do this is empirically evaluated using simple statistical methods and a lot of calculations. These knobby items come directly out of the Organizational Diagnostic Survey included in HALO.
We use the power of computers to rummage through the enormous sets of data in order to locate the knobby HALO results explaining a high percentage of the variance in the COI items. For example, if there are 40 COI items, there will be 40 x 53 = 2,120 possible correlations to check. If there are 1,000 respondents in the HALO sample, this is a whole lot of computation.
This procedure is entirely objective. The programs search for the best fits given our algorithms. The result of these analyses is a fresh and independent examination of the relationships.
The knobs have other uses. The choice knobs are sets of processes, made up sets of ODS Items and based directly on the theory of the organizational hologram, called Key Implementing Processes. These 29 knobs can explain the COI item variance. However, they are put to another use: They become variables in a mathematical computation using a standard optimization method called linear programming.
Basically, the computer takes the individual data, calculates the values of the 29 KIPs for every respondent, and then calculates the average for those participating in the study. These are then fed into a linear programming model to assess probable impacts of "turning" the knobs on the operation of the whole organization. This is the idea for assessing the effectiveness of possible interventions for improving your organization. As the data are take directly from your employees, there is no hidden norming, agendas, or preferred solutions. The program starts the intervention assessment analysis based on the facts provided by your own people. As in our other methods, the analysis is objective.
The Linear Programming model is technical. The extended discussion provides a wealth of systems information an expert would need to assess the power of our methods. They are very powerful.
One of the HALO Standard Reports, the Organizational White Paper, includes intervention effectiveness assessment based directly on the linear programming model. The linear programming model includes 41 standard constraints. It is possible to add or change constraints in order to specifically tailor the analysis to your specific circumstances.
The use of knobby analysis to examine relationships between knobby HALO results and knobless COI results usually produces an embarrassment of riches. There are often literally hundreds of correlations that are statistically significantly non-zero. The causal-chain method is a means for winnowing this abundance of good results to the few that are most meaningful.
A simple correlation is an indication of a relationship between a pair of variables. It can be, but need not be, evidence of a causal relationships. In the causal-chain method, we make use of the structure of the Holonomic processes (cf. the analytical pyramid). A Leadership Practice or LP is a good prediction of a COI item if these conditions are met:
This is "the looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck" test. A good predictor must pass these embedded tests.
Sometimes there will be more than a single predictor. The causal-chain analysis then uses other decisions theoretic methods to weed out the weaker predictions. The result is always completely objective, often surprising, and intuitive.
One of the unique features of the HALO technologies is that it generates detailed analysis of the organizational level learning processes in an organization. In addition to an overall assessment of the I.Q. of the organization, HALO technologies provide a more fine-grained analysis of the sources of learning ability and disability. These methods are based on our research (66, 67, 68, 69).
| Site Map |