Understanding Conative Tests: Beyond Personality to Hardwired Drives

What if those advantages are deliberately more favorable than what's offered to those already at the top? What if we created entire systems designed to give extra support, resources, and opportunities to those who are behind?

If you felt a visceral "no" just now, I get it. Such suggestions often trigger immediate pushback about merit, fairness, and earning your way.

But what if I told you that some of America's most beloved and profitable institutions have been doing exactly this for decades? And not only do we accept it - we enthusiastically tune in every week to watch it work?

Welcome to the NFL draft.

Every year, we watch a system that deliberately advantages struggling teams. The Browns don't get told to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps." The Giants aren’t accused of cheating when they get early picks of top talent. Instead, we've built entire structures to ensure that those at the bottom get extra help, additional resources, and preferential access to new opportunities.

And here's the kicker: Look at the Kansas City Chiefs heading into Super Bowl 2025 this Sunday. Despite a system that deliberately gives advantages to struggling teams, the Chiefs are appearing in their fourth Super Bowl in five years. Having systematically lower draft picks hasn't destroyed their ability to excel. They've simply had to continue working hard and making the most of their opportunities - just like everyone else.

Giving advantages to those who are behind doesn't automatically diminish those at the top. The Chiefs aren't losing because other teams get better draft picks. Excellence, merit, and hard work still matter – we've just created a system that gives everyone a better shot at achieving them.

Why? Because we understand something fundamental about sports that we seem to struggle with in other contexts: Sometimes, helping those who are behind lifts up the entire game.

Now, let's be clear - the challenges faced by struggling NFL teams aren't directly comparable to the systemic barriers and historical disadvantages faced by marginalized communities in our society. Professional sports franchises worth billions aren't the same as generations of families who've been denied access to education, housing, or career advancement opportunities. The parallel isn't perfect.

But the principle illuminates something important about how we think about advantage and opportunity. If we can understand that giving struggling teams extra support makes the whole league stronger, why do we resist programs designed to give historically disadvantaged groups better access to opportunity? If we celebrate systematic advantage every Sunday, why do we question it on Monday morning?

I don't claim to have the perfect policy solutions for addressing generations of systemic inequality. These are complex challenges that require thoughtful, nuanced approaches. But what I do know is this: There are people and communities who need us, as a society, to create better pathways to opportunity - not handouts, but real chances to compete and excel. Just as we've done in sports, we can create systems that both maintain high standards and ensure everyone has a fair shot at meeting them.

The timing couldn't be more relevant. As we debate dismantling DEI programs in 2025, millions will gather this Sunday to watch our most profitable sports league showcase a system built on the principle that those with the longest distance to cover need extra support to compete. So perhaps before we rush to declare victory over "unfair" corporate DEI initiatives, we should ask ourselves: If we can cheer for equity on the field, why not in the workplace?

By afternoon, I discovered I had made a significant mistake. One that taught me a fundamental truth about trust in the workplace: it's not about what we do right, but about the expectations we don't even know we're failing to meet.

What Trust Really Means

At its simplest, trust is the belief that someone will meet your expectations. But here's what makes it complex: these expectations are often invisible, shaped by our natural drives and motivations that run far deeper than our conscious awareness.

When trust breaks down in professional relationships, it typically stems from misalignment in three key areas: character, competence, and compassion. Each person brings their own set of expectations to these components, often without realizing it.

The Three Components of Trust

Character: The Foundation

Character expectations form the bedrock of trust. While we often think of character as a universal standard - either someone has integrity or they don't - the reality is more nuanced. What one person considers a breach of integrity, another might view as practical flexibility. These differences in expectations about character and values can create invisible friction in teams.

Competence: Not Just About Being "Good"

Here's where expectations get particularly interesting. Consider this scenario from my own experience: I once had a team member deliver a project that met all our core requirements. They completed it ahead of schedule, hit all the major objectives, and felt proud of their work. Yet their manager was deeply disappointed. Why?

The manager had a natural drive for precision and detail. To them, competence meant thorough, meticulous work where every detail was perfect. The team member, however, was wired to prioritize speed and big-picture impact. Their definition of competence centered on rapid delivery of functional solutions.

Neither was wrong - they simply had different expectations about what "good work" meant. This misalignment eroded trust on both sides: the manager began to doubt the team member's capabilities, while the team member felt their contributions weren't valued.

Compassion: The Hidden Expectation

Remember Sarah? Her situation revealed something crucial about trust and compassion. By not asking about her weekend - something I wouldn't typically expect or need myself - I had inadvertently violated her expectation of leadership support and connection.

What makes this particularly challenging is that Sarah herself might not have consciously known she had this expectation until it went unmet. Her natural drive for social connection and personal acknowledgment meant that my standard "get down to business" approach felt like a betrayal of the supportive relationship she expected from leadership.

Building Better Trust Through Understanding

These stories highlight a crucial truth: trust isn't something that's simply earned through consistent good behavior. It's actively given when we meet others' expectations - expectations that are deeply rooted in their natural drives and motivations.

So how do we build better trust in our teams? Here are three key steps:

1. Recognize That Expectations Vary
   
   • Understand that different team members will have different expectations about what constitutes good character, competence, and compassion
   • Accept that these differences stem from natural drives, not personal shortcomings
2. Make Expectations Explicit
   
   • Create open dialogue about working preferences and expectations
   • Discuss what trust means to different team members
   • Define what success looks like from multiple perspectives
3. Adapt Your Approach
   
   • Adjust your leadership style based on individual team member needs
   • Build systems that accommodate different working styles
   • Create flexibility in how goals can be achieved

The Path Forward

‍Understanding these natural differences in trust expectations can transform how we build and maintain professional relationships. Instead of assuming everyone shares our definition of trustworthy behavior, we can create environments that acknowledge and respect different working styles and expectations.The key isn't to change who we are or force others to change - it's to understand these natural differences and build bridges across them. When we do this, we create stronger, more resilient teams where trust can flourish.

We've all seen it: The perfect candidate on paper - impressive skills, stellar experience, glowing references. Then three months in, it's clear something's not clicking. They're struggling, the team's frustrated, and you're wondering how you missed the signs.

Here's the uncomfortable truth: We're asking all the wrong questions in hiring.

The Great Skills Chase

For generations, we've been obsessed with skills and experience. We scrutinize resumes, hunting for the perfect combination of certifications, tools, and past roles. But let's be honest - when was the last time a new hire walked in completely ready to go, with no need for training on your specific:

• Systems and tools
• Company processes
• Team dynamics
• Cultural norms

Yet we keep chasing the skills-unicorn while overlooking something far more fundamental: how people are naturally hardwired to work.

Understanding Hardwiring: The Missing Piece

‍Hardwiring represents the core drives and motivations that shape how someone:

• Processes information
• Makes decisions
• Solves problems
• Communicates with others
• Responds to pressure
• Approaches innovation

Unlike skills that can be taught or experiences that can be gained, these attributes are remarkably stable throughout someone's career. They're the foundation that determines not just if someone can do a job, but how they'll approach it and whether they'll truly thrive in the role.

The Hidden Cost of Getting It Wrong

‍The numbers are staggering:

• 46% of new hires fail within 18 months (Leadership IQ Study)
• Direct costs of a mis-hire range from 30% to 150% of annual salary (US Department of Labor)
• Up to 500% of annual salary when including comprehensive costs like recruiting, training, lost productivity, and culture impact (Society for Human Resource Management - SHRM)
• 80% of turnover is due to poor hiring decisions (Aptive Index research)

But these statistics only tell part of the story. The real costs run deeper:

• Disengaged employees going through the motions
• Team dynamics thrown off balance
• Innovation stifled by misalignment
• Culture eroding from within

The Hardwiring Revolution

‍Understanding hardwiring transforms how organizations:

Hire with Precision

‍Instead of gambling on resume keywords, you can predict how someone will actually perform in a role by understanding their natural drives and motivations.

Build Stronger Teams

‍When you understand how team members are hardwired to work, you can:

• Optimize communication patterns
• Reduce unnecessary friction
• Leverage complementary strengths
• Foster genuine collaboration

Develop Better Leaders

‍Leaders who understand hardwiring can:

• Adapt their management style effectively
• Build more cohesive teams
• Drive higher engagement
• Reduce turnover
• Increase innovation

Making the Shift

‍Ready to move beyond the resume? Here's how to start:

1. Rethink Your Hiring Process Look beyond surface qualifications to understand candidates' natural drives and motivations.
2. Map Your Team Understand the hardwiring of your existing team to identify strengths, gaps, and opportunities.
3. Align Roles with Nature Structure positions to leverage people's natural strengths rather than fighting against them.
4. Build Understanding Foster a culture where different working styles are understood and valued.

The Future is Hardwired

‍In today's rapidly evolving workplace, understanding hardwiring isn't just an advantage - it's a necessity. Organizations that embrace this approach will:

• Build more resilient teams
• Drive higher performance
• Reduce costly turnover
• Create stronger cultures
• Unlock true innovation

The question isn't whether to make this shift, but how quickly you can implement it before your competition does.