Why Self-Awareness Is the New Competitive Advantage
Jason P. Carroll's journey from scaling Champion National Security to founding Aptive Index shows why self-awareness is leadership's competitive advantage.
The gap between what leaders think they know about their teams and what actually drives performance has never been wider. Remote work exposed it. Hybrid models amplified it. And the cost of getting it wrong keeps climbing.
A ValiantCEO Magazine feature on Jason P. Carroll, founder and CEO of Aptive Index, walks through the moment that changed how he thought about teams, conflict, and growth.
The Breaking Point
In 2016, Carroll was scaling Champion National Security—800 to 2,500 employees in seven years. The growth was real. So was the friction.
He and the company's COO were stuck in constant tension. Carroll pushed for change. The COO prioritized stability. To each other, they were roadblocks.
Then the team introduced psychometric assessments.
What emerged wasn't a personality quiz. It was clarity about motivational wiring—the drives that shaped how each leader approached decisions, risk, and execution.
The conflict didn't disappear. But the context did.
They stopped fighting over who was right and started leveraging why they were different. Stronger partnership. Faster decisions. Company positioned for acquisition.
That experience became Aptive Index. Not because it felt good. Because it worked.
Why the Old Playbooks Don't Work Anymore
The ValiantCEO interview highlights what many leaders are quietly confronting:
- Gen Z prioritizes purpose over paychecks
- Remote work fragmented communication
- Engagement and results feel increasingly at odds
Carroll's insight: most leadership breakdowns aren't about strategy or skill. They're about misalignment.
Misalignment between how leaders think people work and how they're actually wired. Between role demands and individual drives. Between culture and what people need to thrive.
The leaders solving for this aren't guessing. They're measuring.
What Gets Measured
Aptive Index surfaces the motivational patterns that determine how people show up under pressure:
- Influence needs — Lead by directing or supporting?
- Connection drives — Recharge through collaboration or independent work?
- Structure preferences — Thrive in predictability or ambiguity?
- Speed orientation — Prioritize accuracy or momentum?
Understanding how these interact reveals why two equally talented people perform completely differently in the same role.
This creates a framework for:
- Hiring that matches wiring to role demands
- Development that builds on natural strengths
- Team composition that turns friction into productive tension
The DEI Shift
One of the more direct points in the interview: DEI fails when it focuses on optics instead of alignment.
Aptive Index shifts the focus from culture fit (which reinforces sameness) to role fit and motivational alignment.
The question isn't "Do they fit our mold?"
It's "Does their wiring match what this role actually requires?"
Diversity without alignment creates friction, not strength. Inclusion without understanding creates presence without value.
Stop hiring for likeness. Start hiring for complementary drives.
What This Means
If you're leading a team, the lesson is straightforward:
You can't optimize what you don't understand.
The invisible layer—motivational wiring, stress response, decision-making patterns—determines outcomes more than resumes or gut instinct.
Leaders who integrate behavioral science aren't doing it for trends. They're doing it because the cost of misalignment is measurable.
This applies to hiring, team dynamics, development, and culture design.
The Work
Carroll's background—scaling to $80 million in revenue, leading through acquisition, certifying as an executive coach under Brené Brown—reflects one principle:
Leadership is about creating conditions for others to succeed.
Aptive Index operationalizes that. It gives leaders tools to see clearly, decide confidently, and build teams that perform under real conditions.
The future of work isn't about office vs. remote. It's about understanding the humans doing the work—and designing systems that align with how they're actually wired.
That's not a platitude. It's the work.
Read the full interview here.
You may also like
You’ve heard it a thousand times in hiring conversations:
“They’re a great culture fit.”
And its quieter counterpart:
“They’re just not a culture fit.”
But here’s the uncomfortable question most leaders never ask:
What does that actually mean?
Because if you can’t define culture fit with precision, you can’t hire for it with confidence.
And if you can’t hire with confidence, you’re not making strategic decisions.
You’re making expensive guesses.
The Problem Hiding in Plain Sight
“Culture fit” may be the most commonly used — and least clearly defined — concept in modern hiring.
Organizations invest enormous energy crafting culture decks, defining values, and communicating their mission. Yet nearly half of new hires fail within 18 months, and most of that failure has nothing to do with competence.
It comes down to fit.
So why does the culture conversation still break down?
Because most organizations are measuring the wrong layer of fit.
When hiring managers say “culture fit,” they’re usually reacting to subtle interpersonal cues:
Did the conversation feel easy?
Did the candidate laugh at the right moments?
Did they remind me of people I enjoy working with?
None of those signals measure culture.
They measure familiarity.
And familiarity is where bias quietly enters the process.
The Affinity Bias Trap
Humans have a natural tendency to trust people who think, communicate, and behave like they do.
Psychologists call this affinity bias.
It rarely feels like bias. It feels like intuition.
A hiring manager walks out of an interview and says:
“Something felt off.”
But often something much simpler happened.
A high-Sociability leader just interviewed a thoughtful, low-Sociability candidate. The candidate was measured, deliberate, and careful with words — excellent traits for the analytical role being filled.
But the conversation didn’t feel energetic.
So the candidate doesn’t move forward.
Not because of a values mismatch.
Because of a behavioral style mismatch with the interviewer.
This is how organizations quietly build monocultures — teams that feel comfortable but lack the diversity of thinking required to solve complex problems.
Why Values Interviews Aren’t Enough
Many organizations recognize the subjectivity of culture fit and try to solve it with values-based interview questions.
Candidates are asked to share stories demonstrating company values. Panels score responses. Hiring committees compare notes.
It’s more structured than gut instinct.
But it still misses the deeper issue.
Because values alignment is largely learnable.
A thoughtful candidate can read your values page the night before an interview and articulate them fluently the next day.
But culture isn’t just about what people believe.
It’s about how they’re naturally wired to work.
And that’s where most hiring processes stop short.
The Layer Beneath Behavior
Beneath every employee is a set of stable, measurable drives that shape how they approach work.
How they make decisions.
How they handle change.
How they interact with people.
How they balance speed with accuracy.
These drives don’t fluctuate based on mood or interview preparation. They remain relatively stable across contexts.
At Aptive Index, we measure four of the most predictive drivers through the ISCP framework:
Influence – the drive to shape people, decisions, and direction.
Sociability – the need for connection, belonging, and interaction.
Consistency – the preference for stability versus rapid change.
Precision – the need for accuracy, rules, and standards.
These attributes aren’t personality labels.
They’re motivational drivers — the underlying architecture of how someone naturally operates at work.
When leaders understand these patterns across their teams, culture stops being abstract.
It becomes observable.
Culture Isn’t What You Say. It’s What Thrives.
Here’s the insight many organizations miss:
Your culture isn’t defined by your values statement.
Your culture is defined by the behavioral patterns of the people who succeed in your environment.
Take a fast-growing startup that prides itself on speed and experimentation.
When you analyze the drive patterns of their top performers, a clear pattern emerges:
Low Consistency – they thrive in constant change.
High Influence – they naturally drive decisions.
Low Precision – they move quickly and iterate.
That pattern is the organization’s real culture.
Now imagine hiring someone who prefers structure, detailed planning, and clearly defined processes.
They might believe deeply in the mission.
They might align perfectly with the company’s values.
But the day-to-day environment will drain their energy.
Eventually they disengage, struggle, or leave — and everyone wonders why a promising hire didn’t work out.
Nothing was wrong with the person.
The drives didn’t match the environment.
Redefining Culture Fit
If culture fit is going to be meaningful, it has to move beyond vague impressions.
It needs to become behaviorally defined.
That starts with a few simple steps.
First, analyze the drive patterns of your highest performers. Those patterns reveal the real demands of the environment.
Second, define behavioral targets for key roles — not just skills, but the drives that predict success.
Third, separate values alignment from drive alignment in your hiring process. Values can be discussed in interviews. Drives should be measured with validated psychometrics.
Finally, help hiring managers recognize the difference between true misalignment and style differences that strengthen the team.
When organizations move from instinct to insight, culture fit stops being subjective.
It becomes strategic.
The Advantage Most Leaders Miss
The most effective leaders eventually realize something important:
Culture fit isn’t about hiring people who feel familiar.
It’s about understanding the behavioral architecture of your organization well enough to know what it actually needs next.
When leaders distinguish between values alignment and behavioral drive alignment, they make better hires, build stronger teams, and avoid filtering out the very people who could expand their team’s capabilities.
Culture fit, done right, isn’t about similarity.
It’s about intentional design.
And in a world where talent decisions increasingly determine competitive advantage, that clarity becomes a strategic advantage.
In the landscape of professional assessments, personality tests have dominated for decades. However, a different type of assessment—the conative test—offers unique insights that traditional personality assessments can't capture. These tests measure not who we are (personality) or what we know (cognitive), but how we naturally take action when faced with problems to solve.
Typing "conative" into your device will cause it to get red squiggly-lined, and maybe even autocorrected to "cognitive." But trust us, it’s a real word.
What is Conation and What Do Conative Tests Measure?
Conation comes from the Latin word "conatus," meaning "effort" or "striving." It represents our innate drive to act and solve problems—the natural, hardwired tendencies that influence how we approach tasks, make decisions, and interact with our environment.
While personality tests measure adaptable behaviors and preferences shaped by experience, conative tests measure more stable, innate drives that have typically been consistent since our teenage years. These drives represent how we are hardwired to work when free from external pressures.
Conative tests measure attributes such as:
- Natural pace and approach to tasks
- Innate tendencies toward structure versus flexibility
- Drive for precision and detail
- Motivation to influence outcomes or lead
- Need for social interaction versus independent work
- Adaptability to change versus preference for consistency
Benefits of Measuring Conative Traits
Understanding conative traits offers several advantages over solely relying on personality assessments:
1. Greater Stability Over Time
Conative traits tend to remain more consistent throughout adulthood, while personality can shift significantly based on environment, roles, and experiences. This stability makes conative assessments particularly valuable for long-term career planning and development.
2. Prediction of Natural Performance
Conative assessments help predict how someone will naturally perform in various environments. When someone's conative drives align with their role requirements, they often experience:
- Reduced stress and burnout
- Higher job satisfaction
- Better performance with less effort
- Longer tenure in roles
3. Insight Into Team Dynamics
Understanding the conative drives of team members reveals natural strengths and potential friction points, allowing leaders to:
- Optimize task allocation based on innate strengths
- Improve communication by acknowledging different working styles
- Create more balanced teams with complementary drives
- Reduce unnecessary conflict stemming from different approaches
Popular Conative Assessments in the Market
Kolbe A™ Index
One of the pioneers in conative assessment, the Kolbe A™ Index measures four "Action Modes":
- Fact Finder: How we gather and share information
- Follow Thru: How we organize and arrange
- Quick Start: How we deal with risk and uncertainty
- Implementor: How we handle space and tangibles
The Kolbe uses a 1-10 scale for each mode and focuses exclusively on these conative elements without mixing in personality factors.
Predictive Index
While Predictive Index doesn't specifically label itself a conative assessment, it measures what they call "drives" and needs through a two-list methodology. These drives—Dominance, Extraversion, Patience, and Formality—share similarities with conative factors, though they represent a blend of motivational and behavioral elements rather than pure conative traits.
Aptive Index: A Hybrid Approach to Assessment
Aptive Index represents a next-generation approach that combines elements of both conative and adaptive measurement, designed specifically for today's workplace challenges. The name itself—a blend of "adaptable" and "conative"—reflects this hybrid nature, measuring both hardwired drives and how these express themselves in workplace contexts.
Scientific Foundation
Aptive Index measures eight key attributes that research shows directly impact job performance and satisfaction:
Primary Attributes (ISCP)
- Influence: Drive to impact people, events, and outcomes
- Sociability: Drive for and energy gained from social interaction
- Consistency: Drive for stability, routine, and methodical approaches
- Precision: Drive for accuracy, adherence to rules, and attention to detail
Standalone Attributes
- Emotional Resonance: Ability to deeply connect with emotions
- Prosocial: Drive to support others and contribute to collective wellbeing
- Intensity: Natural pace and sense of urgency when approaching tasks
- Abstraction: Capacity for abstract thought and innovative problem-solving
The inclusion of Intensity as a distinct attribute is particularly valuable, as it measures a person's natural pace and sense of urgency independent from their preference for structure (Consistency) or detail (Precision). This distinction helps explain why some individuals can be simultaneously methodical yet quick-moving, or flexible yet deliberate in their pace.
User Experience Advantages
Designed for practical application in modern organizations, Aptive Index offers:
- Mobile-first platform design for easy access
- 8-minute average completion time versus 60+ minutes for many competitors
- Clear, actionable insights without requiring extensive interpretation
- Modern user interface following contemporary UX principles
Practical Implementation
Rather than purely theoretical insights, Aptive Index provides practical applications for:
- Hiring and selection decisions
- Team composition analysis
- Leadership development
- Conflict resolution
- Communication optimization
The Reality of Conative Assessments: Transparency Matters
While conative tests provide valuable insights, it's important to understand their limitations and proper context:
Stability vs. Rigidity
Conative traits are relatively stable but not completely static. They can shift subtly over time or in response to significant life events. The key distinction is that these shifts are typically:
- Gradual rather than sudden
- Limited in magnitude
- Often temporary during extreme circumstances
For example, someone might show slightly different conative patterns during major life transitions or periods of high stress, but their core tendencies generally remain recognizable.
Accuracy Trade-Offs
Shorter, more accessible assessments like Aptive Index prioritize practical usability and adoption. This creates inevitable trade-offs:
- Depth vs. Accessibility: More comprehensive assessments may provide deeper insights but require significantly more time and expertise to administer and interpret.
- Specificity vs. Applicability: Highly detailed assessments might capture nuanced variations but can become impractical for organizational use.
- Theoretical Purity vs. Practical Value: Some assessments maintain strict theoretical boundaries between conative, cognitive, and affective domains, while others like Aptive Index intentionally incorporate elements that have proven practical value for workplace applications.
Complementary, Not Comprehensive
Conative assessments should be viewed as one valuable tool in a broader toolkit for understanding human potential and performance, not as a complete solution. They work best when combined with:
- Skill and experience evaluation
- Cultural fit assessment
- Interviews and reference checks
- Performance data
Conclusion: The Future of Conative Assessment
As work environments become increasingly complex and dynamic, understanding conative drives becomes even more valuable. Modern assessments like Aptive Index reflect this evolution, combining scientific rigor with practical usability.
The most effective organizations recognize that conative assessment isn't about fitting people into rigid categories but about creating environments where everyone can contribute through their natural strengths while developing strategies to address areas of potential challenge.
By understanding the stable yet nuanced nature of conative drives, organizations can build more effective teams, reduce unnecessary friction, and create the conditions for both individual fulfillment and collective success.
Looking to explore how conative assessment could benefit your organization? Learn more about Aptive Index's modern, mobile-friendly approach to measuring innate drives and optimizing team performance at aptiveindex.com.
The Player Everyone Gave Up On
Maya had the mechanics.
Clean footwork. Textbook shot release. Unstoppable in practice.
But game time changed everything.
Shoulders tensed. Decision-making collapsed. By the fourth quarter, she'd be benched.
Her coach tried everything. Visualization. Positive self-talk. Confidence building.
Nothing worked.
Because Maya's problem wasn't emotional intelligence. It was nervous system dysregulation.
Why EQ Isn't Enough
EQ identifies what an athlete is feeling. It can't explain why their body betrays them under pressure.
Research shows 65% of performance breakdown stems from autonomic nervous system dysregulation. Not lack of skill. Not lack of confidence.
When cortisol and adrenaline flood the system, the prefrontal cortex goes offline.
No amount of "stay calm" overrides that physiological state.
The Hidden Drivers
Maya's coach assessed her using the Aptive Index.
Two attributes explained everything:
High Intensity: Her internal motor ran fast. In practice, this made her explosive. In competition, it pushed her into chronic over-arousal.
High Emotional Resonance: She didn't just experience mistakes - she carried them. A first-quarter turnover echoed into the second.
These aren't personality quirks. They're stable neurological patterns that require different interventions.
The Breakthrough
Maya's coach stopped treating anxiety as a mindset problem.
He started coaching her nervous system:
- Pre-competition: 5 minutes of box breathing
- Between plays: Touch sideline, exhale twice, say "Next"
- Timeouts: 30 seconds eyes closed, breath-focused
Within four games, her shooting percentage under pressure jumped from 31% to 58%.
Not because she got more skilled. Because her body had tools to stay regulated.
The Real Unlock
EQ says: "Maya is anxious."
The Aptive Index says: "Maya's high Intensity is pushing her into sympathetic overdrive, and her high Emotional Resonance means she's still processing the mistake from two plays ago. She needs a parasympathetic reset before she can execute."
One is observation.
The other is intervention.
Maya didn't need more confidence. She needed nervous system regulation.
Once her coach could see what EQ couldn't measure, everything changed.
That's where championship performance lives, not in what you can see, but in what you finally learn to unlock.