Résultats de recherche

In the workplace, the word intelligence can sometimes evoke caution, or even a degree of discomfort. Yet the scientific literature has long shown that cognitive abilities play an important role in professional success. They contribute to the acquisition of job-related knowledge, and therefore to learning, as well as to the occupational level attained over the course of a career, that is, to performance. This does not mean that intelligence explains everything, nor that it replaces personality, motivation, values, or experience. Rather, it indicates that intelligence is one of the variables that any serious professional should not overlook when trying to understand a person’s performance potential (Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). To properly understand this link with work performance, it is useful to distinguish between two major forms of intelligence: fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence. In the Cattell–Horn–Carroll tradition, fluid intelligence refers to the ability to reason through new problems, identify relationships, apply logic, and adapt to unfamiliar situations. Crystallized intelligence, by contrast, refers to acquired knowledge, vocabulary, consolidated learning, and experience accumulated over time (Flanagan et al., 2013). In other words, one is more concerned with the ability to deal with the unknown; the other with the ability to effectively draw on what one already knows. In a professional context, this distinction is essential. When a job requires someone to quickly understand a new situation, navigate ambiguity, solve unfamiliar problems, or learn rapidly, fluid intelligence becomes especially relevant. Conversely, when a role depends on mastering procedures, applying standards, using technical knowledge, or drawing on accumulated expertise, crystallized intelligence takes on a central role. In real organizational life, the two are almost always combined: we learn through fluid intelligence, then consolidate and capitalize on what we have learned through crystallized intelligence. This is precisely why a global reading of “intelligence” is often less useful than a differentiated reading of its components. Research in work psychology clearly supports the idea that there is a real link between intelligence and job performance. The classic work of Schmidt and Hunter showed that general cognitive ability predicts job performance and occupational attainment, and does so better than experience alone (Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). Other studies have also shown that this relationship is especially important when a job involves a strong learning component, problem-solving demands, or cognitive complexity. In other words, the more a job requires understanding, integrating, interpreting, and adjusting to many elements, the more useful cognitive information tends to be in anticipating success. At this point, professionals should retain the following: if intelligence does not guarantee performance, it often constitutes an important lever of performance . Contemporary scientific research also invites a more nuanced reading of historical effect sizes. More recent methodological work has argued that some classic estimates of validity in personnel selection were probably overstated because of overly generous statistical corrections. Recent conclusions do not say that cognitive ability no longer matters, but rather that shortcuts should be avoided and that interpretation should be more cautious and more contextualized (Sackett et al., 2022; Sackett et al., 2024). For practitioners, the right conclusion is therefore not to abandon cognitive assessment, but to integrate it intelligently into a broader model of performance. This nuance is important, because work performance does not depend on cognition alone. Personality traits also play a significant role. Barrick and Mount (1991), in their now-classic meta-analysis, showed that certain Big Five traits—particularly conscientiousness—are linked to performance across various criteria and occupational groups. Likewise, Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, and Barrick (1999) showed that personality contributes to explaining career success beyond general cognitive ability. The practical message is simple: a high-performing individual at work is not only someone who understands quickly; it is also often someone who is organized, persistent, adaptable to context, and able to maintain reliable behavior over time. It should also be remembered that the link between cognition and performance is not identical across all facets of performance. Some research suggests that cognitive ability is more strongly related to task performance than to more relational behaviors such as cooperation or constructive voice. This aligns with the intuition of many practitioners: understanding quickly and reasoning accurately helps a great deal in executing work well, but it is not enough to explain the quality of collaboration, collective engagement, or contribution to team climate (LePine, Erez, & Johnson, 2001). What should we conclude for practice? First, at the selection stage, it is useful to reflect on the exact nature of the role. If the job involves a great deal of novelty, ambiguity, problem solving, and learning transfer, the fluid dimension deserves particular attention. If the role depends more on mastery of knowledge, procedures, specialized vocabulary, or accumulated technical expertise, then prioritizing the crystallized dimension becomes strategic. Next, during onboarding and development, the distinction between the two forms of intelligence can guide interventions: manuals, structured training, and reference frameworks nourish crystallized intelligence more directly, whereas case studies, simulations, open-ended problems, and situational exercises place greater demands on fluid intelligence. Finally, in talent management, distinguishing between the two dimensions of intelligence makes it easier to understand why some people learn very quickly in a new environment, while others excel mainly when they can capitalize on already consolidated expertise. A more targeted study conducted among German and Swiss workers illustrates this idea of complementarity particularly well. Hagmann-von Arx and colleagues (2016) observed that crystallized intelligence was positively related to occupational competence level, while certain facets of conscientiousness contributed to other indicators of success such as income or job satisfaction. Although this study relies on a modest sample and should not be overinterpreted, it highlights an important point: in real professional life, success often results from a combination of cognitive ability, acquired knowledge, and personal dispositions. Ultimately, the real question professionals should ask is not simply, “Is this person intelligent?” Rather, it should be: “ What form of intelligence does this role require, in what proportion, and how does this information interact with personality, experience, motivation, and the work context?” Under that condition, cognitive assessment becomes truly useful—not as a label, but as a more refined tool for understanding performance, learning potential, and professional adaptability. References Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Flanagan, D. P., & Dixon, S. G. (2013). The Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. Hagmann-von Arx, P., Meyer, C. S., & Grob, A. (2016). Testing relations of crystallized and fluid intelligence and the incremental predictive validity of conscientiousness and its facets on career success. Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. LePine, J. A., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. E. (2001). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis , and related work on task performance and cooperative behaviors. Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2022). Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. Sackett, P. R., Demeke, S., Bazian, I. M., Griebie, A. M., Priest, R., & Kuncel, N. R. (2024). A contemporary look at the relationship between general cognitive ability and job performance. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance.

When it comes to romantic compatibility, we often hear two opposing ideas: “Opposites attract” and “Birds of a feather flock together.” In scientific psychology, the reality is more nuanced. Research shows that couples do display a certain degree of similarity, but it is often modest—or even very small—especially when it comes to the major personality traits (Watson et al., 2004; Visser & Bedard, 2025). In fact, when researchers try to explain relationship satisfaction, it is not so much “being similar” that matters most, but rather which traits each partner brings into the relationship, and how those traits are expressed in daily life (Dyrenforth et al., 2010; Malouff et al., 2010). In this article, we review what science actually says: which traits are associated with more satisfying relationships, how important personality similarity truly is in couples, and how these findings can be translated into practical actions when choosing a partner. Do Romantic Partners Really Resemble Each Other in Personality? Yes, but… Studies on assortative mating (the tendency to choose a partner who resembles oneself) generally conclude that similarity is stronger in certain areas (e.g., values, attitudes, lifestyle), and often weaker for strict personality traits (Watson et al., 2004; Visser & Bedard, 2025). A classic study of newlyweds even found little similarity in personality, whether self-reported or rated by the spouse (Watson et al., 2004). More recent syntheses and reviews on personality in intimate relationships confirm that personality is considered when selecting a partner, but similarity is not always very high for the Big Five dimensions, and it may vary depending on the specific traits and contexts (Visser & Bedard, 2025). Science therefore cautions us: even if two individuals have similar profiles, this does not guarantee a happier relationship. Some research suggests that similarity may help in certain contexts, but the effect is not systematic and depends on the nature of the shared traits and how they operate within the couple’s dynamics (Brandstätter et al., 2018; Dyrenforth et al., 2010). What Best Predicts Satisfaction: “My Trait” or “Our Similarity”? Modern research on couple satisfaction often uses a dyadic approach (viewing the couple as a system influenced by both partners). It focuses on: • Actor effects: my traits predict my satisfaction (and sometimes relationship dynamics); • Partner effects: my partner’s traits predict my satisfaction. Researchers have also examined whether similarity adds anything beyond these effects. This is referred to as the “similarity effect.” Findings show that the similarity effect is often small. A highly cited study using nationally representative samples from several countries concluded that personality similarity explains only a minimal portion of satisfaction once actor and partner effects are taken into account (Dyrenforth et al., 2010). In other words, happiness does not come from “being the same”; it comes more from each partner (and especially the couple as a system) possessing traits that facilitate cooperation, emotional regulation, and problem-solving (Dyrenforth et al., 2010; Malouff et al., 2010). The Traits Most Associated with Satisfying Relationships Meta-analyses and reviews converge on one key point: some traits are more consistently linked to relational well-being (Malouff et al., 2010; Visser & Bedard, 2025). a) Neuroticism (Emotional Instability): The Most Consistent Risk Factor A major meta-analysis found that lower neuroticism is consistently associated with higher relationship satisfaction (Malouff et al., 2010). Why? Because neuroticism is typically linked to: • Greater stress reactivity • More threat-based interpretations • Increased rumination and prolonged conflict Longitudinal studies (following couples over time) also show associations between this trait and changes in satisfaction, including correlated changes over time (O’Meara & South, 2019). b; Agreeableness: The Couple’s Social Lubricant Agreeableness—expressed through cooperation, empathy, kindness, and respect—is generally associated with higher relationship satisfaction (Malouff et al., 2010; Visser & Bedard, 2025). In practice, this translates into: • Fewer conflict escalations • More repair behaviors • Greater emotional validation c) Conscientiousness: Reliability and Daily Stability Conscientiousness is also linked to satisfaction. Several studies suggest it plays a role in relationship stability and effective daily functioning (Malouff et al., 2010; Visser & Bedard, 2025). d) Extraversion: Generally Positive (but More Variable) d) Extraversion—associated with energy, positive affect, and sociability —tends to correlate positively with satisfaction, though the effect is often more modest and context-dependent (Malouff et al., 2010; Visser & Bedard, 2025). e) Openness: A More Ambiguous Contribution Some reviews report a more variable link for openness. This reminds us that no trait is inherently good or bad—it depends on how it is expressed within the relationship and whether partners’ life projects align (Visser & Bedard, 2025). Similarity: When Can It Help… or Hurt? Similarity is not useless; it simply often matters less than we imagine (Dyrenforth et al., 2010). When Similarity May Help • Regarding values, goals, or lifestyle, compatibility appears more crucial than pure personality similarity (Watson et al., 2004; Visser & Bedard, 2025). A study of newlyweds found greater similarity in these areas than in overall personality (Watson et al., 2004). • For certain vulnerable profiles, similarity may matter more in specific contexts—particularly when attachment insecurity makes the relationship more sensitive to uncertainty and unpredictability (Hudson & Fraley, 2014). When Similarity May Not Help (or May Hurt) Similarity can become problematic if both partners share the same vulnerability (e.g., two highly emotionally reactive individuals, or two very disorganized individuals). Overall, research suggests that outcomes depend more on the combination of traits + behaviors + context than on similarity alone (Brandstätter et al., 2018; Visser & Bedard, 2025). What These Findings Change in Practice To avoid the trap of searching for “magical compatibility,” couples may benefit from the following: Replace “Are we compatible?” with “What risks and strengths do we bring to our relationship?” Satisfaction depends largely on: • The ability to regulate stress and conflict (often linked to neuroticism) • Cooperation and consideration (agreeableness) • Reliability and daily management (conscientiousness) (Malouff et al., 2010; Visser & Bedard, 2025) The issue is less about having the same profile and more about having traits that foster protective behaviors (Dyrenforth et al., 2010). Invest in Relationship Skills That Buffer Traits Traits are not destiny. For example • A more anxious individual can develop communication routines • A less conscientious individual can use tools (clear rules, explicit task sharing, etc.). These strategies align with the idea that traits influence satisfaction primarily through their impact on interactions and daily adjustment (Dyrenforth et al., 2010; Visser & Bedard, 2025). Do Not Use Personality as a Verdict Personality is descriptive language, not a verdict. Studies describe probabilistic tendencies, not individual destiny. Moreover, personality questionnaires never explain everything. Relationship history, external stressors, health, finances, parenting, and communication quality also play major long-term roles (Visser & Bedard, 2025). Remember the Important Study Limitations To remain scientific (and credible), we must remember: • Many studies are correlational—they do not prove that a trait guarantees satisfaction. • Some results vary depending on age, relationship duration, and culture. • Self-report measures may overestimate associations, which is why dyadic models and longitudinal data are valuable (Dyrenforth et al., 2010; O’Meara & South, 2019). Conclusion: Compatibility Is Not “Being the Same,” but “Functioning Well Together” To summarize the research in one sentence: personality similarity does exist, but it often explains little of relationship satisfaction; what matters more are traits that support emotional regulation, cooperation, and daily reliability (Dyrenforth et al., 2010; Malouff et al., 2010). For couples (or future couples) seeking harmony, the goal is not perfect personality alignment, but rather to: Identify strengths (e.g., empathy, stability, responsibility) Recognize likely friction points (e.g., reactivity, disorganization, rigidity) Implement concrete strategies that protect the relationship (Visser & Bedard, 2025). Source ; Brandstätter, H., Brandstätter, V., & Pelka, R. B. (2018). Similarity and positivity of personality profiles consistently predict relationship satisfaction in dyads. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 1009. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01009 Dyrenforth, P. S., Kashy, D. A., Donnellan, M. B., & Lucas, R. E. (2010). Predicting relationship and life satisfaction from personality in nationally representative samples from three countries: The relative importance of actor, partner, and similarity effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 690-702. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020385 Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. (2014). Partner similarity matters for the insecure: Attachment orientations moderate the association between similarity in partners’ personality traits and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 112-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.09.004 Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Schutte, N. S., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. E. (2010). The Five-Factor Model of personality and relationship satisfaction of intimate partners: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 124-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.09.004 O’Meara, M. S., & South, S. C. (2019). Big Five personality domains and relationship satisfaction: Direct effects and correlated change over time. Journal of Personality, 87(6), 1206-1220. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12468 Visser, B. A., & Bedard, T. (2025). Traits and mates: The role of personality in intimate relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 65, Article 102053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102053 Watson, D., Klohnen, E. C., Casillas, A., Nus Simms, E., Haig, J., & Berry, D. S. (2004). Match makers and deal breakers: Analyses of assortative mating in newlywed couples. Journal of Personality, 72(5), 1029-1068. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00289.x

Emotional intelligence (EI) is the ability to form and maintain quality social relationships, to recognize, understand and regulate emotions, to adopt goal-oriented behaviors, and to cope with the demands, challenges and pressures of everyday life. A person with high emotional intelligence can manage impulses, communicate effectively with others, handle change well, solve unexpected problems, and use humor to build rapport in tense situations. She also shows empathy and remains optimistic even in the face of adversity. This “clarity” of thought and “composure” in stressful and chaotic situations is what distinguishes the most successful from the least successful people in their personal and professional lives. From the very beginning, the definition and nature of emotional intelligence have been the subject of fierce controversy. Lately, experts seem to have come to agree that there are two types of emotional intelligence. One, known as “ability emotional intelligence”, implies a particularly high capacity to process emotional information and is related to, though distinct from, cognitive abilities. The second, called “trait emotional intelligence (TET)”, is a concept first proposed in 2001 by  Petrides and Furnham . It is linked to personality and can be represented by a combination of personality traits that are particularly effective in situations with emotional and social implications. Wally IE  is a more trait-based measure of emotional intelligence, assessing it in the form of competencies. Emotional intelligence is seen as a set of personality traits comprising a constellation of dispositions linked to emotions, self-perception and the ability to interact with others. Wally IE distinguishes two groups of skills: those relating to the self, known as “intrapersonal skills”, and those focusing on others, or “interpersonal skills”. Intrapersonal skills Emotional, motivational, decision-making and behavioral self-management skills. Interpersonal skills The ability to create, develop and maintain lasting, high-quality interpersonal relationships. Interpersonal skills have 5 underlying competencies, defined as follows: Openness: the ability to adapt to change, to novelty, to different contexts and environments, and to a variety of people.Self-direction: the ability to set and achieve meaningful goals, to persevere, to commit, and to be thoughtful and disciplined.Emotional regulation: ability to regulate internalized negative emotions (e.g. anxiety, stress and vulnerability) and externalized negative emotions (e.g. impulsivity, anger and frustration), and to be optimistic.Bonding skills: the ability to connect with new people, energize a group and positively influence those around you.Relational skills: the ability to maintain quality relationships with others, based on benevolence, humility, collaboration and support.In the remainder of this text and our forthcoming publications, we will discuss these different aspects of emotional intelligence.  Relational skills, an essential dimension of emotional intelligence An important aspect of emotional intelligence is  relational capacity .Developing our relational capacity facilitates and enriches our relationships with others, whether personal or professional. It focuses on the following dimensions and helps us to acquire the attitudes and behaviours associated with them 1.   Effective communication Active listening   :  Listening attentively to others, showing concentration and genuine interest in what they have to say. Clear expression   :  Knowing how to express one's own thoughts, feelings and needs clearly and respectfully. 2.   Empathy Emotional understanding   :  Perceiving and understanding the emotions and perspectives of others, which requires putting oneself in the other person's shoes and responding appropriately to their emotional needs. Emotional responsiveness   :  Responding sensitively to other people's emotions, thereby fostering authentic, trusting relationships. 3.   Creating and maintaining relationships Trust and respect   :  Establish relationships based on mutual trust and respect, which requires respecting others' boundaries and treating people with integrity. Reflection and feedback:  Be open to feedback and adjustments in interactions, and use this information to improve relationships. 4.   Conflict management Conflict resolution   :  Know how to approach conflict constructively, seeking win-win solutions and maintaining positive relationships despite disagreements. Negotiation and compromise   :  Negotiate and compromise to reach mutually satisfactory agreements. 5.   Collaboration and teamwork Collaborative spirit   :  Work effectively with others by fostering a cooperative environment and valuing each other's contributions. Collective motivation   :  Encouraging and supporting others to achieve common goals, while maintaining a positive group dynamic. Interpersonal Connectedness, according to the Emotional Intelligence model, is therefore defined as the ability to communicate effectively, understand and respond to others' emotions, build and maintain strong relationships, manage conflict constructively, and cooperate with others. This skill is crucial for building lasting relationships and succeeding in collaborative environments, both personal and professionnal In this sense, a better understanding of your emotional intelligence can help you to improve this essential aspect of your daily life: your interpersonal relationships. Wally IE is designed to help you do just that, by assessing your current skills. To find out more, click  here

While some attribute the use of the term sapiosexuality to the emergence of geek culture in the media, you may be surprised to learn that it's a universal notion that concerns us all. Regardless of your sexual orientation or gender identity, you could be sapiosexual. To determine whether you have this profile, let's first try to understand what it means. A person is said to be "sapiosexual" if he or she is attracted by the intelligence he or she perceives in another person. They may, for example, admire the way someone speaks, thinks, is creative, reflects or sees the world differently. Such a person might be seduced by philosophical or intellectually stimulating conversations, or by a particular sense of humor that resonates with them. In this sense, sapiosexuality is defined as a type of sexuality that consists of being attracted more by the content of a person's mind than by the appearance of their body. To feel sexually attracted to someone, a sapiosexual must first feel challenged on a mental level. The search for a partner: a decisive choice Basically, we're all looking for personal satisfaction and the need to be fulfilled. Most of us are also looking for a partner with whom to maintain, if possible, a long-term relationship. Although satisfaction with one's own life is the result of a subjective and cognitive evaluation of all its dimensions (Diener et al., 1985), it should be noted that the value attributed to a partner predicts this long-term satisfaction, regardless of relationship status. The choices people make when selecting romantic or sexual partners therefore have important consequences for their psychosocial health and developmental success. It's hardly surprising, then, that these choices have been the subject of a great deal of scientific research, and that many researchers have taken an interest in the subject. What emerges from their findings is that, for both men and women, intelligence is a highly sought-after characteristic in a long-term partner (Buss, 1989; Jonason and Antoon, 2019). Physical attraction and psychological preference There's no scientific doubt that physical attractiveness is extremely important in choosing a partner (Regan et al., 2000). However, this doesn't mean that men (or women) only want to date Victoria's Secret models, or that women (or men) only have eyes for famous actors like Brad Pitt. Certainly, everyone needs their minimum standards of physical attractiveness to be met in order to engage in a relationship with anyone (Jonason and Antoon, 2019; Jonason et al., 2019; Li and Kenrick, 2006). Without this, no sexual attraction is possible and people will go their separate ways or simply remain friends. But once these minimum standards - let's call them physical criteria - are met, there are plenty of psychological characteristics (e.g. IQ, status and shared values) that people find attractive (Li et al., 2002). And while some of these (e.g. humor, agreeableness and personality) are more important to many people than physical appearance (Regan et al., 2000), it's intelligence that is the primary criterion for sapiosexuals. To evaluate your degree of sapiosexuality, you need to assess the importance you attach to your current or future partner's intelligence. But how do psychometric experts measure intelligence? Perceived general competence Among our ancestors, intelligence probably played a role in hunting, gathering, orienteering and tool-making. Today, socially recognized skills have more to do with the ability to adapt to a changing world. In such a context, a partner's intelligence offers distinct advantages for navigating modern life. What appeals to sapiosexuals in this sense is the perception of general competence. Although intelligence is an important trait assessed by psychometrics (as an indicator of general competence), sapiosexual individuals' partner preferences are not necessarily focused solely on it. Partner selection may also be based on more overt indices of intelligence, such as education, income (or earning power), social status, creativity and sense of humor (Miller, 2001). In other words, intelligence, which is often hidden from observers and researchers in the field - making it difficult to measure its importance or to draw statistical correlations when choosing a partner - is also an integral part of many sub-traits. Indeed, intelligence (the primary trait) is closely linked to secondary competence traits, positively correlated with education (Ganzach et al., 2013), occupation and income (Strenze, 2007), creativity (Silva, 2008) and sense of humor (Howrigan and MacDonald, 2008). This suggests that all these traits may be competing but non-collinear indicators of competence, with the possibility that intelligence may be the most central trait in the group. It would thus be natural to expect an individual with superior intelligence to attain and complete a higher level of education (on average), which would confer higher social status and income (on average). Indeed, studies of partner preference for intelligence and education level converge on similar conclusions (Jonason and Antoon, 2019; Jonason et al., 2019), with some researchers even combining education and intelligence into a single dimension (Fletcher et al., 2018 In conclusion... The term sapiosexuality is relatively new and not without controversy. Some argue that it is not a legitimate orientation, but a type of attraction. People who describe themselves as sapiosexual suggest, however, that intelligence is more than just a quality they appreciate in a partner; it's the main factor in their sexual attraction, in the same way that a beautiful body or face has the potential to seduce others. Like intelligence, sapiosexuality knows no limits! It can be embraced by men, women, trans people, bisexuals and more. Since sapiosexuality is based on criteria other than physical and sexual characteristics, it opens the door to the discovery of people from different groups, and gives a whole new dimension to the portrait we form of our attraction to o

Intelligence can be defined as the ability to act according to circumstances and in a way that enables the individual to solve puzzles or everyday problems According to renowned psychologist Raymond Cattell, a person's general intelligence comes into play when he or she tackles general problems that are not linked to specific skills or knowledge. The two main categories of general intelligence are fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence manifests itself in the ability to think abstractly and solve simple or complex problems, while crystallized intelligence represents the accumulation of knowledge and skills over time. Fluid intelligence is more closely linked to information processing speed and working memory, while crystallized intelligence is more closely linked to long-term memory. Crystallized intelligence and long-term memory are in fact deeply intertwined, with the impact of previous experiences helping to build the foundation of crystallized intelligence. With the passage of time, fluid intelligence tends to decline, while crystallized intelligence tends to increase. One of the differences between fluid and crystallized intelligence lies in the fact that fluid intelligence remains constant throughout life, while crystallized intelligence continues to evolve over time. Indeed, crystallized intelligence is subject to the influence of age. Conversely, fluid intelligence undergoes little change with the passage of years. Portrait of fluid intelligence Fluid intelligence, also known as "Gf" (general fluency), is conceptualized by Cattell as "the innate ability to deal with situations independently of how a similar situation has been approached in the past". This type of intelligence is mainly called upon in developing planning strategies, solving reasoning problems such as logic challenges or quizzes, and performing unexpected activities requiring the application of mental skills or abilities. Making connections and analyzing scientific questions is difficult without this form of intelligence, since inductive or deductive reasoning must be deployed in this context. The use of thought patterns is possible, however, as this intelligence enables the smooth transfer of mental logic to simple problem-solving over time. Etymologically, the term fluid evokes a continuous flow. We could conceive of fluid intelligence as a river flowing through life, accumulating everything in its path. Its decline with age is due to the diminishing performance of brain cells. Over the years, this form of intelligence diminishes, as the use of logical reasoning is not constant in all individuals. Portrait of crystallized intelligence Crystallized intelligence, also known as "Gc" (general crystallized intelligence), mobilizes previously acquired knowledge to navigate through life's situations. Formal education and moral principles inculcated in childhood contribute to the development of crystallized intelligence. Prior knowledge, rooted in the foundation of learning, is relevant when similar problems have already arisen. The memory of previous experiences in turn helps an individual to maintain his or her level of knowledge. For example, a person who developed comprehension skills when learning to read (a childhood experience) will later exploit this "prior knowledge" when dealing with comprehension questions posed in competitions or learning activities. Recourse to memorized information in another context helps to reactivate this knowledge. The growth of crystallized intelligence with age can be attributed to an increase in mental capacity to memorize more data and to assimilate experience-based learning more deeply. Various tests can be conducted to examine the effect of aging on this capacity. However, the conclusions drawn from ageing may differ from one individual to another, and may be called into question in the case of diseases such as Alzheimer's. One thing is certain: crystallized intelligence is inseparable from fluid intelligence, with the two intertwining in a complementary fashion. Summary of the main differences between fluid and crystallized intelligence 1. Foundation : - Fluid intelligence is based on personal skills and thinking ability. - Crystallized intelligence is based on past knowledge that can be applied to cope with present situations. 2. Impact of age: - Fluid intelligence decreases with age. - Crystallized intelligence continues to increase with age and the accumulation of experience. 3. Problem-solving approach: - Fluid intelligence requires the application of logic in problem solving. - Crystallized intelligence relies solely on existing knowledge, without requiring precise mental capacity. 4. Influence of past experience: - Fluid intelligence is not motivated by past experiences. - Life experiences are essential for crystallized intelligence. 5. Concrete examples of use : - Examples of situations in which fluid intelligence is called upon: solving logical reasoning tests, solving puzzles. - Examples of situations in which crystallized intelligence is called upon: memorizing historical facts, recalling documents memorized during an exam, etc.

Empathy is defined as the ability to understand and feel what others are experiencing. Although it is common to a large number of mammals, it is found very strongly in Homo sapiens. However, the level of empathy can be very different from one person to another. This characteristic, which thus becomes a strength or weakness in us, is a more complex faculty than one might imagine. How does empathy manifest itself? According to Anaïs Roux, author of the Neurosapiens podcast and a book of the same title, there are two forms of empathy: affective and cognitive. Affective empathy is the one most commonly experienced. It refers to the ability to feel the emotions of others, while avoiding confusing them with one's own. There is always a risk of emotional contagion. And while it's desirable to put oneself in the other person's shoes to better perceive what they're experiencing, it's important not to allow oneself to be overwhelmed by these emotions, in order to maintain self-control. Cognitive empathy, on the other hand, consists in understanding the emotions or state of mind of others, without actually feeling them. Here, we are involved in an intellectual process of recognizing the emotions experienced by others, without actually identifying with them. To help us understand the difference between these two types of empathy, Anaïs Roux compares them to the two sides of a coin. Affective empathy, corresponding to the visible side of the coin, acts in a bottom-up way, i.e. it synthesizes in someone the basic elements of emotions perceived in others. Empathic people experience the emotions they perceive in others, and react to them in their bodies. Cognitive empathy, on the other hand, can be compared to the other side of the coin: it acts in a top-down fashion, using cognition to analyze the overall picture and identify each of the emotions expressed by the other person. The empath has detailed knowledge of these emotions, but remains detached. These two approaches work in parallel, depending on the moment or the emotions involved. Even so, some people are more likely to show cognitive empathy, while others tend to show affective empathy. For example, we know that people who lack the ability to feel pain (see studies by Danziger, 2009) are unable to feel another's affect. The only empathy they show is of a cognitive and rational nature, since the emotions shown by others do not reach them. In general, these people have a lower level of empathy. Empathy and neuroscience The most recent research attempts to demonstrate that empathy is the result of the effect of mirror cells. "Mirror neurons are a category of neurons in the brain that show activity both when an individual performs an action and when he observes another individual performing the same action, or even when he imagines such an action, hence the term "mirrorˮ", explains neurologist Claire Dussaule ( Mathon 2013). These neurons are thought to play an important role in social cognition, among other things through learning by imitation. They are also thought to play a major role in forging empathy, by reinforcing the ability to feel what the other person is feeling. Neuroscience describes empathy as a cognitive process that involves a broad spectrum of brain activity and the participation of a large number of brain structures. It's an intense work of representation and imagination that takes place within us in order to be able to feel what the other is experiencing. The ability to adopt the other person's perspective comes from activation of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, just behind the forehead. Another activated area is thought to be at the temporo-parietal junction, behind your ears. The source of empathy is the amygdala, which plays (among other things) an important role in recognizing fear in the faces of others. Abigail Marsh's 2019 studies showed that people with a greater capacity to activate the amygdala, and who therefore better recognized fear in the faces of others, gave more money and time to people in difficulty. They would therefore show a higher level of empathy. In several of this researcher's studies, it was found that children with personality disorders who showed different activation of the amygdala in their social relationships expressed lower levels of empathy than the average person. Part of empathy could therefore stem from genetic traits. Further research is needed to validate this hypothesis, but initial studies seem to point in this direction. Currently, we attribute the degree of empathy to personality development. An important conclusion, according to Anaïs Roux, is that empathy is ON in the vast majority of the population, whereas it is OFF in people suffering from mental disorders (i.e., with a personality disorder or psychopathology). This is confirmed by brain imaging, which shows greater brain activity in the prefrontal cortex and amygdala in people who show a higher level of empathy recognized by others. The ability to empathize enables humans to better anticipate and recognize emotions, and thus make better predictions about the intentions and needs of others. This ability would lead to prosocial behaviors such as cooperation and mutual aid. What about psychometrics? Personality tests that measure empathy do not indicate whether it is affective or cognitive in nature. Their results are a self-reported measure of empathy (compared with that of others via normative data), with the person being asked to judge how he or she would behave or what attitude he or she would adopt in everyday situations. Bibliography Anaïs Roux, Neurosapiens, Paris, Les éditions Les Arènes, 2023. B. Mathon, Les neurones miroirs : de l'anatomie aux implications physiopathologiques et thérapeutiques, Revue Neurologique,Volume 169, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 285-290, ISSN 0035-3787,

Nonverbal intelligence tests are designed to measure an individual's intellectual abilities without the use of culture-specific knowledge. In this article, we will examine in detail why these tests are considered culturally unbiased and how they can add validity to IQ tests. *** First, it is important to understand that traditional IQ tests, such as the WISC or WAIS, have often been criticized for their lack of cultural validity. They are often based on questions that measure knowledge about a particular culture, such as idioms, proverbs, or cultural references. Individuals who have not been exposed to such a cultural environment, because of their background, may score lower than those who have been exposed, even though all have similar intellectual abilities. This disparity may produce biased results that do not reflect the true intelligence of each individual. Nonverbal intelligence tests, on the other hand, are designed to measure intellectual ability through tasks that do not require specific cultural knowledge. Nonverbal tasks may include visual puzzles, jigsaw puzzles, picture sequences, or construction patterns. They are often based on spatial, perceptual, and logical reasoning skills rather than cultural knowledge. Thus, nonverbal intelligence tests can be considered less culturally biased, as they are not influenced by the native language, education, or cultural background of the test taker. In addition, nonverbal intelligence tests can add validity to traditional IQ tests by providing additional information about a person's intellectual abilities. They can be used to measure specific skills, such as spatial reasoning or the ability to solve complex problems, that are not measured by traditional IQ tests. Thus, non-verbal intelligence tests can provide a more complete picture of an individual's intellectual abilities, helping to identify certain strengths and weaknesses. It is also important to note that non-verbal intelligence tests can be particularly useful in assessing individuals with language disorders, such as deafness or autism, or learning disabilities, such as dyslexia or dyscalculia. These disorders can affect a test taker's ability to understand and use language, and affect scores on traditional IQ tests. By minimizing the impact that a language or learning disability may have on an individual's performance, non-verbal intelligence tests provide a more accurate measure of an individual's intellectual ability. *** In more detail, here are the main reasons why non-verbal intelligence (NVA or nonverbal anologies Test ) tests are considered culturally unbiased and can add validity to IQ tests: NVA tests measure cognitive skills that are less influenced by language and culture. Traditional IQ tests are often based on language and verbal skills, such as language comprehension, reading, writing, and problem solving with a verbal dimension. However, these skills are strongly influenced by the language and culture of the test taker. NVA tests, on the other hand, are based on cognitive skills that are less dependent on language and culture, such as visual perception, spatial memory and problem solving. NVA tests are less influenced by language and cultural differences between test developers and test takers. Traditional IQ tests can be biased by linguistic and cultural differences between test developers and test takers. For example, non-native speakers of French may have difficulty understanding IQ test questions and instructions. NVA tests, since they do not require any language knowledge, are less subject to the effect of these linguistic and cultural differences, making them more fair and accurate for people of different cultures and languages. NVA tests add validity to IQ tests. NVA tests add validity to traditional IQ tests by measuring additional cognitive skills that are not measured by traditional IQ tests. By adding measures of nonverbal cognitive skills, NVA tests provide a more complete picture of a person's cognitive abilities. NVA tests can also help identify individuals who have high cognitive skills but struggle to show their potential on traditional IQ tests due to language and cultural differences. NVA tests can reduce cultural bias in IQ tests. Traditional IQ tests have been criticized for their cultural bias because they were developed primarily using Western population samples and are based on language skills. NVA tests can reduce cultural bias in IQ tests by measuring nonverbal cognitive skills that are less influenced by language and culture as a complement to IQ tests. NVA tests facilitate the assessment of individuals with language-related disorders. Traditional IQ tests can be difficult for people with language impairments, since they require language proficiency that they do not possess. By drawing on other dimensions of intelligence, NVA tests bypass the difficulties faced by people with deafness, autism, or dyslexia. They allow them to obtain results that reflect their true level of intelligence.

As Westerners, we tend to rely on facial appearance to make an initial judgment about someone, especially a judgment of trust. Our first impression of a person is thus formed from the physical characteristics of their face. The existence of a social consensus in the judgments made about individuals sharing certain facial features suggests that, when perceived by different observers, these features lead fairly systematically to similar judgments (Melissa Carré, 2021). A reflex impossible to inhibit When we first meet someone, we are first exposed to a new face. The perception of its different aspects quickly contributes to the formation of our first impression. The latter occurs automatically, without us being aware of it or being able to inhibit it. It is in fact a reflex, i.e. we do not have to make any cognitive effort. This first impression can then be used as a heuristic (or cognitive shortcut) to judge the trustworthiness of the person and to answer complex questions, such as those asked by an evaluator during a job interview. What the research says Faces, and particularly the information they convey, have attracted the attention of early studies in psychology, whether it be on the detection of emotions or the deduction of personality traits. Although current research recognizes that the face is a vehicle for emotions, it does not consider that it reflects personality. Instead, researchers focus on the mechanisms that lead us to make judgments based on the face. They are thus interested in what we call "impression formation". The work of Nikolaas N. Oosterhof and Alexander Todorov in 2008 informs us about the first impression based on the face of our interlocutor. In their work, these researchers first identified and catalogued a wide variety of psychological traits spontaneously used to categorize emotionally neutral faces, such as attractiveness, sociability, aggressiveness, and dominance, to mention a few. They then subjected these judgments to a principal component analysis. In doing so, the researchers demonstrated that social judgments can be grouped under two orthogonal dimensions: · Emotional valence, which is the ability to perceive the positive or negative character of our emotional state from our face, and more particularly from our smile; · dominance, which would be associated with masculine features and facial maturity associated with facial aging. Figure 1: Examples of faces with neutral expressions. Examples of trait-based judgments It would be difficult to provide an exhaustive list of possible variations in facial features in individuals adopting a neutral expression. However, it can be seen that the shape of the mouth has a strong impact on the trustworthiness of a person: the more trustworthy the face is perceived to be, the more the line between the lips appears to be U-shaped, and vice versa. This characteristic associated with a trustworthy face is reminiscent of the curve in a person's face when smiling. It is therefore possible to think that we perceive the reliable face as that of a happy person. The assumption that a happy person is a reliable person is, of course, a generalization. It is because certain facial features (e.g., the U-shaped lip line) evoke universal emotional expressions (such as the smile of a happy person) that this type of generalization takes place and colors our judgment. We unconsciously judge that if a person is happy, he or she must be likeable and therefore trustworthy, which of course is not always true! Other examples of facial features influencing trust judgments about a person at the first impression stage were given by the researchers: - The closer the features were to an angry expression, the more untrustworthy (or dominant) the face was perceived by observers. - As the distance between the eyes and the eyebrows increased, the facial features became more baby-like, and thus were perceived by observers as those of a trustworthy person. In general, there is a social consensus that most observers perceive the expression of anger on a face as inversely proportional to the degree of trustworthiness. In other words, the face on the right in Figure 1 would likely be perceived as that of an unreliable person. Conversely, the more happy a face looks, the more likely it is to be categorized as trustworthy. This would be the case, for example, with the face on the left in Figure 1; most observers' judgment of the person to whom it belongs would likely be positive. What is the lesson to be learned from this? When we look at a face, we can extract different types of information that tell us about the person and his or her situation (e.g., age class, membership in a population group, or emotional state). This ability to detect and interpret information from the face is innate and develops throughout life. This is why children are particularly interested in the faces of adults, and adolescents and adults are better able to interpret the faces of their peers. What is extremely interesting is the consistency of our judgments observed in the study by Oosterhof and Todorov[1] . In fact, almost everyone denotes the same characteristics in a face and associates the same judgment to it. Carré (2021) points out that "contrary to the recommendation in the phrase 'you shouldn't judge a book by its cover', most of us quickly and effortlessly infer personality traits based solely on facial appearance" (Bar et al., 2006; Walker & Vetter, 2009; Willis & Todorov, 2006). In other words, every encounter we have is likely to be colored by the unconscious cognitive bias of first impressions. Confidence judgment represents one of the main dimensions of social judgments made on the basis of a first impression, as it can explain more than half of the total variance in evaluations made from faces (Oosterhof & Todorov, 2008). In a recruitment context, this can have a direct impact on the confidence you have in a candidate during a first interview. Be wary of your first impression, or at least learn to minimize it. By being aware of this possible cognitive bias in your selection process, you will ensure that you give every face you meet a chance, regardless of its features. [1] Oosterhof, Nikolaas N. and Alexander Todorov (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of The National Academy of Sciences, 105(32), 11087-11092.

This text is the first in a series on cognitive biases. The concept of "cognitive bias", introduced in the early 1970s, is the result of the research work of psychologists Daniel Kahneman (winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002) and Amos Tversky, who sought to justify the sometimes irrational decisions made in the field of finance. These two researchers were able to establish that, in a context where an individual must make a judgment quickly and where there is uncertainty and a large amount of information, this individual will unconsciously seek to simplify his mental schemas in order to quickly evaluate the situation and decide. However, this tendency will often have an impact on his reasoning and will distort his appreciation of reality, resulting in irrational decisions. Cognitive biases are therefore defined as thought mechanisms that distort reality due to an alteration in judgment linked to a dysfunction in reasoning (cognitive distortions). They are false logical, unconscious and systematic reflexes of thought. They are also called "unconscious biases" because they are based on conjectures, beliefs and learned attitudes that populate our subconscious. They are shortcuts, or deviations, that allow us to speed up and simplify the processing of information. Some biases are explained by limited cognitive resources (e.g., time, information, interest, cognitive abilities). When these are insufficient to perform the analysis necessary to make a rational judgment, cognitive shortcuts, called "heuristics", replace global analytical reasoning by establishing inferences that are acceptable to the individual, which leads to a reduction in complexity. In short, the decision-maker resorts to a simplified cognitive strategy to save time and facilitate his decision making. The shortcuts he takes may, however, prove to be false from a logical-deductive point of view and are therefore likely to generate biases in his mind. The reason for identifying and analyzing these biases is that snap judgments are often the basis for typical misjudgments. Other biases reflect the intervention of motivational, emotional or moral factors. These may be, for example, the desire to maintain a positive self-image (overconfidence, self-indulgence) or to avoid unpleasant cognitive dissonance (having two incompatible beliefs). In this regard, cognitive biases should not be confused with the latter. In social psychology, the term cognitive dissonance refers to the discomfort or tension felt when several of our beliefs seem incompatible with each other. Cognitive dissonance is a sort of internal struggle, whereas cognitive biases, as we will see in their various expressions, can have an impact on others, particularly in the field of candidate recruitment. First example of cognitive bias: confirmation bias Confirmation bias is one of the most common biases. It is defined as the tendency to seek out and use information that confirms our opinions and expectations. In other words, it is the fact of selecting or favouring information that corroborates our previous ideas or hypotheses and that is in line with our pre-existing beliefs or convictions. In this system of thinking, alternative analyses that may contradict our beliefs will be ignored, discredited or reinterpreted, regardless of their quality or accuracy (proven facts). Opposing opinions will be approached and treated in a very critical way, by tracking down the slightest flaw in the reasoning. On the other hand, even approximate analyses that are in line with our own hypotheses will be systematically considered admissible. This cognitive bias prevents us from thinking impartially, which can lead us to misinterpret or overlook information that contradicts our point of view. This tendency to pay excessive attention to data that support our preconceived ideas rather than to data that contradict them can be particularly pernicious, especially when our beliefs are built on prejudice (often negative ideas, accepted without prior demonstration). To avoid confirmation bias, it is best to rely on several sources. When testing a hypothesis or doing research, gather information from a variety of sources to form a nuanced viewpoint. While it's always nice to be reassured of your position, you need to think about the consequences of acting on your judgments. This is especially true in the context of recruitment, where a candidate may be eliminated on the basis of false perceptions or accepted on the basis of data that is subjective to our perception. This is why it is important to standardize your interview questions: stick to the usual interview questions so as to avoid asking irrelevant or too specific questions designed to confirm your opinion of a candidate. It is important to remember that psychometric tests add objective value to the assessment and evaluation of candidates.

Forget about millennials. Young people now belong to "Generation Z," a cohort that demographers generally define as those born since 1998. Researchers have spent a lot of effort understanding the attitudes and experiences of people born in the 1980s and early 1990s (i.e., Generation Y, or millennials), who are better educated and poorer than their older counterparts, the Gen Xers and boomers. But these same researchers have collected far less data on Generation Z, who can barely remember a world without social media and smartphones. In America, Gen Zers now make up about a quarter of the population. Yet this generation is more anxious and depressed than previous generations. Alarming numbers Research shows that Gen Zers are currently the most stressed individuals in the population. The American Psychological Association (APA) reports that: 90% of Gen Zers experienced psychological or physical symptoms due to stress in the year 2022. 70% of Gen Zers say that anxiety and depression are significant problems among their peers. 30% of parents surveyed believe their Gen Z child has been negatively impacted emotionally or mentally by social distancing and school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, according to McKinsey Insights, released in 2022, 25% of Generation Z members report emotional distress, nearly double the levels reported by older generations. Stress and mental health, also an issue at work A Deloitte survey conducted in 2022 reports that stress and anxiety levels are high among Gen Zers and women. This survey of Generation Z and millennials reveals that while stress and anxiety affect both generations (Z and millennials), it is higher among members of Generation Z than millennials. 46% of Gen Zers report being stressed or anxious all or most of the time, with women being more affected than men (53% vs. 39%). This compares to 38% of millennials, with a smaller gender gap (41% women vs. 36% men). Women's increased stress levels are also echoed in Deloitte's Women@Work study, also released in 2022, which found that 53% of women felt more stressed than the previous year. The pandemic has highlighted the global mental health crisis. It is also having an impact in the workplace and in school and university settings. However, the Deloitte survey shows that while Gen Zers and millennials have mental health issues, the majority (57% of Gen Zers and 53% of millennials) recognize that workplace wellness has become more important to their employers since the pandemic began. For empathetic leadership This new reality highlights the importance of having managers who place empathy at the heart of leadership. Developing a culture of trust and inclusion is the best way for employers to have a real impact on the mental well-being of their employees. Allowing individuals to be themselves at work will not only increase engagement and diversity, but will create an environment in which they feel able to freely discuss their stress and anxiety issues without fear of being judged by their colleagues and superiors. Empathetic leadership is in this sense a critical factor in workplace well-being, as is the ability of managers to understand and talk about mental health.

"The best things in life are unexpected because we had no expectations." Eli Khamarov We all have expectations of ourselves, of others, of consumer items or of situations. When these expectations are not met, it is possible to feel disappointed, sad or even discouraged. Understanding the factors that influence how we manage our expectations and those of others is an important step in freeing ourselves from these negative emotions. Should we believe in magical thinking? When we have expectations, we want them to come true! However, simply expecting something to happen is not enough to make our wish come true. Jean Piaget, a leading child development psychologist, noted that young children have difficulty distinguishing between the subjective world they create in their heads and the objective world outside. According to his observations, children therefore sometimes believe that their thoughts can directly cause events (e.g., having angry thoughts about one's little brother can cause him to fall down the stairs). Piaget refers to this as "magical thinking" and says that we should all be past this type of thinking by the age of 7. However, it turns out that many normal adults still engage in various forms of magical thinking. Prayer, in particular, can be seen as a way of calling for the fulfillment of an expectation without requiring any concrete action on the part of the individual. This is obviously not a way of managing expectations, since it totally disempowers the person. How are expectations built? To understand what role we can play in managing our expectations, it is important to know that expectations are gradually formed in the mind of each individual through the following process: expectations are developed from assumptions based on what we think we want or what others want, based on our upbringing or an idealized view of the world. Often these expectations drift away from reality and leave us feeling frustrated. In this regard, the image we project of ourselves is already loaded with the expectations of others: it tries to meet those of our parents, family, teachers, friends, life partner, colleagues, etc. Needless to say, this can be a source of suffering when the very desire to conform to these expectations is at odds with our own aspirations. In this sense, it is important to reflect on the impact that these expectations can have on us and on others. Expectations of oneself The expectations we have of ourselves are as much about how we should behave as what we should aspire to. These expectations strongly influence our relationships with others as well as our self-image. But are these expectations realistic? Do they lead us to improve and surpass ourselves, or do they put pressure on us and feed a poor self-image? If these expectations are creating negative emotions within us, it is imperative to redefine them so that they serve to propel us instead of imprison us. Expectations of others If we have high expectations of others, we run the risk of frustration and disappointment. On the one hand, implicit expectations are almost certain to go unfulfilled; on the other hand, it is unrealistic to think that simply communicating our expectations will make people behave as we want them to. This is why it is important to limit our expectations of others. To do this, we can ask ourselves the following questions: Are our expectations likely to be realized? Have we communicated them well to the people involved? Do they perceive these expectations positively, or do they feel that this increases their stress and feelings of inadequacy? In such a case, it is important to redefine our expectations so that they become a source of motivation for those around us rather than a source of devaluation. An explanatory model of expectation management To illustrate the dynamics of interactions between individuals dealing with role expectations, Katz and Kahn produced the following model: This model can be summarized as follows: individual A has an expectation of his interlocutor B. For example, A wants B to be punctual. If B is punctual, he meets A's expectation and the relationship will be satisfactory. On the other hand, if B does not meet this expectation, A will feel tension, discomfort. Individual A is responsible for managing this discomfort. He must therefore communicate to B that he expects him to be punctual (signified expectation). If the interlocutor understands and values this expectation and tells A, the tension will disappear and relational capital can be developed. To summarize the implications of this model, it is possible to identify four types of expectations that may exist in relation to the role a person is called upon to play: · Conflicting or opposing expectations of each other, even though they have been formulated for the same role. · Expectations that conflict with those of the person, or that run counter to the person's values, needs or skills. · Ambiguous, ill-defined or poorly communicated expectations. · Excessive expectations, or not respecting the person's abilities. Links with the personality profile According to the model presented above, personality influences how we manage our expectations and roles. The interaction between the trait of conscientiousness and the trait of emotional stability provides us with valuable information about the management of self-expectations and the expectations of others, as well as about the relationship to performance. Essentially, the relational dynamics of managing expectations can be established between four types of people. The relaxed person This person has low expectations of themselves. They do not seek success and are not concerned about it. They have nothing to prove to themselves or to others. They handle uncertainty well. They take life as it comes and trust that things will work out for the best. Main features: Not very conscientious and emotionally unstable. Does not have a strong will to succeed and handles emotions well. The disorganized person This person tends not to plan, to take things as they come and to be pessimistic about the future. They are likely to have a low sense of self-efficacy. She also tends to avoid performance situations to avoid failure and humiliation. Responsibilities are a major source of stress for her. She has difficulty managing the expectations of others and tends to make decisions based on emotion. Main features: Not very conscientious and emotionally unstable. Has a low drive to succeed and has difficulty managing emotions. The determined person This person shows a good ability to put aside negative emotions and delay gratification to focus on their goals. They have high achievement goals while being able to handle difficulties. Her moments of discouragement are short and do not cause her to deviate from her goals and plans. She is able to handle the pressure of performance expectations. Main features: Very conscientious and emotionally stable. Wants to succeed and manages her emotions well. The person prone to performance anxiety This person may put a lot of pressure on himself or herself to achieve high goals. Failure and the anticipation of failure cause significant distress. Rigid organization and planning may be a mechanism they use to manage anxiety. She still has difficulty handling pressure and performing, and is at risk of burnout. Main features: Very conscientious and emotionally unstable. Wants to succeed, but has difficulty managing her emotions. Does healthy expectation management contribute to happiness? Learning to better manage our expectations and those of others provides valuable insights into how we can break out of the endless loop of disappointment with unfulfilled expectations. This can hopefully lead to a sense of satisfaction with ourselves and ultimately a sense of well-being. "The greatest obstacle to life is waiting; he who hopes for tomorrow, neglects today." Seneca, Greek philosopher While it is inevitable to have and raise expectations, it is up to us to manage them. To see more clearly what is preventing us from being happy, here are some actions to take and questions to ask ourselves: Differentiate between expectations, needs and desires · Does my happiness depend solely on my ability to meet the expectations of others? · Do I ever try to meet the expectations of others at the expense of meeting my own needs? · Am I able to take into account my own desires in my relationships with others? Identify barriers to self-sufficiency · What prevents me from meeting my own needs? · Do I want someone to take care of me? · If someone else succeeds in meeting my needs or expectations, do I consider this a proof of love or does it make me feel important? Assess the realism of expectations · Are my expectations likely to be met? · In all honesty, can I expect others to act the way I would have acted in such a situation? · Does this expectation of me overestimate my abilities?

To support the idea that everyone's personality is stable would mean that it does not change. Yet you probably remember how you evolved as a result of life experiences, such as the education and attention you received in early childhood, the successes and failures you experienced later in life, and other transformative events. But does the personality change throughout life? And are these observed changes due to an intrinsic maturation of the individual, or to the influence of lived situations? To answer these questions, one of the most difficult tasks in the study of personality has been to develop a taxonomy of traits. Researchers have long wondered what are the most reliable models of trait covariation across individuals. Establishing a taxonomy for youth has been particularly challenging, as children mature to display an increasingly differentiated set of traits. Children evolve rapidly from displaying a small number of emotions-interest, satisfaction, and distress-during infancy to displaying an expanded set of emotions-including joy, sadness, anger, fear, empathy, pride, shame, and guilt-by age 3 (Eisenberg, 2000; Lewis, 2000). In adulthood, other changes can be observed: we tend to become more socially dominant, more conscientious (organized and reliable), and more emotionally stable between the ages of 20 and 40, while openness to new experiences tends to decrease with age (Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006). In other words, even though we consider our personality to be relatively stable, changes do occur. Furthermore, the development of our personality during childhood has lasting consequences for us. For example, studies show that some of our career success and job satisfaction later in life can be explained by what our personality was like as children[1] . Findings from a longitudinal study in Germany A study of a heterogeneous sample of 14,718 Germans throughout adulthood led to several conclusions. First, age has a complex curvilinear influence on average personality levels. Our personality changes rapidly during our youth, stabilizes in adulthood, and changes again in later life. Second, the stability of the rank order of emotional stability, extraversion, openness and agreeableness, in our personality profile, follows an inverted U-shaped function, peaking between the ages of 40 and 60 and decreasing thereafter, while conscientiousness shows a steadily increasing stability of order in adulthood. In short, the older we get, the more our degree of consciousness increases. Third, personality predicts the occurrence of several major life events (selection effects) and changes in response to the experience of these events (socialization effects), suggesting that personality can vary due to factors other than intrinsic maturation, and thus is influenced by environmental factors. In summary, research shows that personality changes throughout the life course, but that it undergoes more pronounced changes at younger and older ages, and that this change is partly due to social demands and life experiences. [1] Judge, T. A., & Higgins, C. A. (1999). The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52, 621-652; Staw, B. M., Bell, N. E., & Clausen, J. A. (1986). The dispositional approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 56-77.

"You can teach a turkey to climb a tree, but it is easier to hire a squirrel." Do you ever feel disappointed that you didn't hire the right person, recognize that you have to fire them because they don't fit, and then have to start the process all over again? One of the first steps in the talent management process is to recruit the right people - those who have potential and whose profile is a good fit with the work expected and the values of your organization. Research has shown that hiring candidates with the behavioral characteristics and motivation to perform well consistently increases productivity, reduces turnover and improves work culture. Understanding the factors that influence your employees' work performance becomes the key to their success and yours. What are the factors that have the greatest effect on job performance? Our performance at work depends on many factors: our motivation, our personality and our cognitive abilities. Research shows that personality only explains about 20-30% of the variation in job performance. In fact, cognitive abilities (overall mental intelligence) are a more powerful indicator. They are thought to explain nearly 50% of our performance at work. How does personality still help us choose the best candidates? Our personality can be defined by the way we, as human beings, react to the constant stimuli around us, including those in our work environment. Personality therefore encompasses a person's feelings, thoughts and relatively stable behavioral patterns. Each individual has a unique personality that sets them apart from others, and understanding their personality gives us clues as to how they are likely to act and feel in various situations. Personality itself can be broken down into smaller, measurable components, allowing researchers to better understand the dominant traits likely to be expressed in certain situations and to measure them on certain scales. Tests (NEO Pi 3 or IPLC) based on the Big Five personality model are used by Human Resources as recruitment or coaching tools to select the people most likely to have the expected attitude and behavior. As a manager of a team, it is also useful to understand the personalities of the various employees that make up the team. This knowledge is especially necessary to give each person the right role. Personality as a predictor of performance Large-scale research, using data from tens of thousands of employees, on the relationship between the Big Five personality traits and job performance has shown that certain traits significantly predict job performance. Indeed, not all personality traits have the same influence on performance. For example, conscientiousness is a consistent predictor of job performance, while emotional stability is a good predictor of personality derailment, and thus of harmful behaviors in a job context. Such results provide evidence to support the use of personality profiles for employee selection in the following job categories: Sale In sales positions, conscientiousness is the best predictor of future performance, followed by extraversion. Customer Service In the area of customer service, conscientiousness is again the best indicator. However, agreeableness and openness are also correlated with job performance. Looking specifically at call center employees, conscientiousness, emotional stability and agreeableness are significantly related to productivity . This unusual mix of traits provides a personality pattern that reflects the complex and demanding nature of interpersonal interactions experienced in this type of job. Skilled and semi-skilled jobs When it comes to the skilled and semi-skilled category, conscientiousness is once again the strongest predictor of performance. It is followed by emotional stability, which is weaker but still significant. Professionals For professionals, conscientiousness is the only one of the Big Five traits that significantly predicts performance. Regardless of the job category, personality is a potentially important predictor of work behavior. That's why, during job interviews, companies try to assess a candidate's personality and potential fit with a desired profile. But these interviews are only as good as the people conducting them; in fact, they are often colored by all the biases that the interviewer may have. To remember: Personality contributes to performance, but only at a moderate level. For this reason, most psychologists recommend using personality tests in addition to other selection tools, such as structured interviews and reference checks. The trait of conscientiousness is the only one of the Big Five personality traits that predicts performance across all job types and levels. Different combinations of personality traits are needed for jobs that have specific demands (such as customer service and management work). * Instead of testing personality alone, you should also test your candidates on cognitive skills, which may be more effective in predicting who will perform well. Personality is certainly an excellent predictor of job satisfaction and other attitudes that contribute to productivity, but ruling people out based solely on the likelihood that they might be unhappy at work is a difficult argument to make in a recruiting context. It is best to use both personality and cognitive ability tests to select your employees; combined, they have a very strong predictive value for employee performance. We invite you to read the other posts in which we examine this time the link between work performance and cognitive abilities ***** Barrick, M., & Mount, M. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26. Barrick, M. R., Patton, G. K., & Haugland, S. N. (2000). Accuracy of interviewer judgments of job applicant personality traits. Personnel Psychology, 53, 925-951. Dalal, R., Baysinger, M., Brummel, B., & LeBreton, J. (2012). The relative importance of employee engagement, other job attitudes, and trait affect as predictors of job performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 295-325. Hurtz, G., & Donovan, J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The big five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869-879. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. Y., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765-780. Judge, T. A., Jackson, C. L., Shaw, J. C., Scott, B., & Rich, B. L. (2007). Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The Integral Role of Individual Differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, (92), 107-127. Kanfer, R. (1992). Work motivation: New directions in theory and research. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 1-53). Chichester, England: Wiley. Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60, 995-1027. Quiñones, M., Ford, J., & Teachout, M. (1995). The relationship between work experience and job performance: A conceptual and meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 48, 887-910. Skyrme, P., Wilkinson, L., Abraham, J., & Morrison, J. (2005). Using personality to predict outbound call center job performance. Applied H.R.M. Research, 10, 89-98. [1] Loose translation of "You can teach a turkey to climb a tree, but it's easier to hire a squirrel." [2] Barrick and Mount, 1991. [3] Hurtz and Donovan, 2000. [4] Barrick and Mount, 1991; Hurtz and Donovan, 2000. [5] Skyrme et al. 2005. [6] Ones et al. 2007. [7] Ones et al. 2007.

We all know that hiring new employees goes through a process from recruitment to onboarding. However, we sometimes forget that there are many key steps in this process. Finding the ideal candidate is like looking for a needle in a haystack. In a labour shortage environment, it can be tempting to speed up the process by hiring a candidate on the spot, without doing due diligence. But what if that candidate turns out to be different from what you imagined during the interview? The entire recruitment and replacement process will have cost you dearly: a bad hire essentially means all your efforts were wasted. You've spent months writing job descriptions, posting "We're hiring!" ads on multiple job boards, social media and internally, encouraging current staff to refer candidates to you. You've sifted through countless resumes, evaluated skills, and conducted phone interviews, before inviting a few onsite for a face-to-face interview. You've reviewed candidates' work histories, checked references, and maybe even scoured social networks like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn to make sure their behavior aligns with the company's culture and employee value proposition. You made an offer, explained the benefits and hoped the response would meet your expectations... In other words, you wasted all the time and money spent on advertising, reviewing resumes, selecting a short list of candidates, interviewing them, and even the induction and training programs they had to go through when they started working. Are you solely responsible for this mess? Numerous studies have shown that not everyone tells the truth on their resume or job application. According to HR.com, 53% of job applications contain inaccurate information, and 34% of all application forms contain outright lies about experience, education, and ability to perform basic job functions. So if you rely solely on the information a candidate gives you because you're in a hurry to get them on the job, you may be hiring the wrong person. However, you won't be alone in your situation: more than 74% of employers admit to having made the wrong choice of candidate for a position! And this has a huge cost for companies, both in money and in various consequences. There are many risks associated with bad hiring decisions. In the rest of this post, we explore these risks and the consequences. Loss of productivity If you have made a bad hire and the employee cannot do the job effectively or as well as the person they are replacing, it is a waste of time. Your organization may have invested the same amount of resources in this new employee, but get significantly less performance in return. Over a period of time, this can have a real impact on the team's overall results and performance. When faced with a struggling colleague, other employees may begin to take on other tasks that are not normally part of their job description. This not only affects their own productivity on the job, but also their ability to meet goals, maintain standards and even meet commitments to your customers. Financial Losses The financial implications of a bad hire can be endless. The costs add up from recruitment to onboarding. If a new hire doesn't make the cut, he or she will have to be replaced, which represents another investment of time and money to recruit, hire and train the replacement. Additionally, and more obviously, some of the behaviors and actions of these new employees can have a direct financial impact on the company, including theft and fraud. Reduced workplace safety Violence in Canadian workplaces is a real and worrisome problem. Statistics Canada found that 17% of self-reported violent incidents, such as sexual assaults, robberies and physical assaults, occurred in the workplace and 38% of victims knew their attackers. Increased bullying among co-workers is also becoming an issue. Identifying at the hiring stage those individuals whose personalities are more likely to commit such acts is becoming imperative for companies. Certain personality traits measure the risk of counterproductive behaviors at work. Brand and Reputation Damage It is common knowledge that word of mouth is one of the most effective ways to build a company's reputation. However, it is a double-edged sword, as a customer's bad experience will have the opposite effect: they will damage your reputation by telling their friends about their experience. For example, an employee who does not belong in customer service and whose negative attitude is associated with your product or service can generate negative publicity. A company with a tarnished brand may have a harder time attracting and recruiting new candidates. For small businesses, this can be devastating when it comes to finding investors and partners. Decreased employee morale and turnover An underperforming employee will most likely create a negative impression on the rest of the team, which will affect staff morale and lower overall productivity. Other employees may be forced to pick up the slack, which can lead to dissatisfaction and departure. Your most talented employees may leave for a more stable environment if the disruption continues. A bad hire reflects on the entire company, causing stress and dissatisfaction among good employees, which can lead to dissatisfaction and higher turnover.

In our complex world, we are called upon to deal with an impressive number of events that cause us stress. Our body's response to this stress is to produce cortisol. Several studies (Drewelies, 2021; Mendonça-de-Souza, 2007) document the link between cortisol in our blood and cognitive deficits. Studies confirm that yoga practice, however, mitigates these effects by restoring balance in the body faced with stress. Gothe et al. (2016) recently demonstrated that a yoga session has a positive effect on working memory and inhibition control in both youth, adults, and the elderly. Recall that executive functions refer to a subset of cognitive functions whose processes are goal-directed (i.e., planning, scheduling, working memory, task coordination, cognitive flexibility, abstract thinking, etc.). These executive functions help us stay on track and accomplish our daily tasks. Background to Gothe's (2016) study. "Prolonged activation of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal system is thought to have deleterious effects on brain function. Neuroendocrine studies suggest that brain exposure to higher concentrations of cortisol contributes to cognitive deficits as we age. Mind-body techniques such as yoga have been shown to improve stress levels by restoring the body's sympathetic-parasympathetic balance. The purpose of this study was to determine if yoga practice moderated the stress response, resulting in improved executive function." Methodology Sedentary, community-dwelling older adults (N = 118, mean age = 62.02) were randomized for 8 weeks to either a yoga group or a control group that practiced fitness and stretching. At baseline and after eight weeks, participants completed self-report questionnaires assessing their executive function, stress, and anxiety levels, and provided saliva samples to measure their cortisol levels before and after completing cognitive tests. Results The yoga participants showed improved measures of executive function and an attenuated cortisol response compared to their stretching counterparts, who showed increased cortisol levels and poor cognitive performance in their follow-up. Changes in cortisol levels as well as self-reported stress and anxiety levels predicted observed performance on the empathy task, n-back working memory, and cognitive flexibility attached to task switching (β's = 0.27-0.38 and p's ≤ 0.05 for yoga; β's = -0.37-0.47 and p's ≤ 0.01 for stretching). Conclusion Eight weeks of regular yoga practice resulted in improved working memory performance mediated by an attenuated stress response that was gauged by self-report and objective measures of salivary cortisol. Thus, this study provides evidence that nontraditional physical activity interventions, such as yoga, may be useful in restoring balance to the HPA (hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal) axis, which is responsible for cortisol production, in older adults, and thus prevent cognitive decline. Gothe NP, Keswani RK, McAuley E. Yoga practice improves executive function by attenuating stress levels. Biol Psychol. 2016 Dec;121(Pt A):109-116. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2016.10.010. Epub 2016 Oct 26. PMID: 27794449. Colcombe S, Kramer AF. Fitness effects on the cognitive function of older adults: a meta-analytic study. Psychol Sci. 2003;14(2):125–130. PubMed doi:10.1111/1467-9280. t01-1-01430 Gothe, Neha & Pontifex, Matthew & Hillman, Charles & Mcauley, Edward. (2013). The Acute Effects of Yoga on Executive Function. Journal of physical activity & health. 10. 488-495. 10.1123/jpah.10.4.488. Baklouti S, Aloui A, Baklouti H, Souissi N, Jarraya M. Effects of Hatha yoga on cognitive functions in the elderly: a cross-sectional study. Libyan J Med. 2022 Dec;17(1):2080799. doi: 10.1080/19932820.2022.2080799. PMID: 35657065; PMCID: PMC9176371. Pauly T, Drewelies J, Kolodziejczak K, Katzorreck M, Lücke AJ, Schilling OK, Kunzmann U, Wahl HW, Ditzen B, Ram N, Gerstorf D, Hoppmann CA. Positive and negative affect are associated with salivary cortisol in the everyday life of older adults: A quantitative synthesis of four aging studies. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2021 Nov;133:105403. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2021.105403. Epub 2021 Aug 30. PMID: 34536776. A. C. F. Mendonça-de-Souza, G. G. L. Souza, A. Vieira, N. L. Fischer, W. F. Souza, V. M. Rumjanek, I. Figueira, M. V. Mendlowicz & E. Volchan (2007) Negative affect as a predisposing factor for cortisol release after an acute stress—the impact of unpleasant priming, Stress, 10:4, 362-367, DOI: 10.1080/10253890701379999

Passive-aggressive behavior is a set of attitudes called "passive" that indirectly express a hidden hostility that is not openly assumed or that remains unconscious in the person who experiences it. It is a behavior that we sometimes adopt instinctively to avoid confrontation. And when we are accused of behaving in a passive-aggressive manner, we are often inclined to play the victim and not acknowledge our share of responsibility... For the record, the term passive-aggressive was first used by an American military psychiatrist to designate, during the Second World War, a soldier who refused to comply with his superiors' orders, without any question of open insubordination. It is an indirect way of not obeying rather than a clear verbalization or frontal opposition. In short, it is a form of rebellion, but without provocation, which can take many forms. Let's look at some examples of situations where passive-aggressive behavior occurs. Withholding anger Are you angry, but never say so? Not verbalizing your anger when you are angry does no one any favors. Anger denial is a classic passive-aggressive behavior. Procrastinating and defying authority Do you procrastinate, find excuses to justify yourself, are you unreliable? These are all signs of passive-aggressive behavior. A person who shows such a tendency will say yes to everything that is asked of them, because they don't know how to say no clearly. But, in reality, they will manage to do nothing by saying they "forgot"! This is a way of defying authority. Not following instructions You don't do what you say? You say you agree, but you do the opposite? When given a task they don't really want to do, the passive-aggressive person may appear to agree, sometimes even enthusiastically, but they will not comply with the request. Playing the victim Are you quite comfortable adopting the posture of the victim and sometimes even exaggerate this status? Passive-aggressive personalities are often adept at the Karpman triangle, a psychological manipulation game that takes the form of a relationship scenario between people who alternately play the roles of victim, persecutor and savior. Passive-aggressives prefer victimization. Sulking Do you express your displeasure without saying so? Sulking and cowering is a reflex of the passive-aggressive person. In other words, his or her reaction will be directly manifested by muteness, indifference and distance, the need to be in relationship and the expectations of dialogue of the other being openly ignored. She will also use sarcasm in her communications to create a tense atmosphere in her relationships. Is this a personality disorder? Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder (PAPD) has been eliminated as an official psychiatric diagnosis and relegated to the appendix of the fourth edition of the DSM (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). However, passive-aggressive behavior continues to play an important role in several theories of personality disorder (PD) (e.g., Benjamin, 1993; Millon, 1981; Morey, Hopwood, & Klein, 2007; Pretzer & Beck, 1996). In a study by Hopwood et al. (2009), who used the NEO pi 3 to develop a portrait of passive-aggressives, the authors noted the following relationships with personality traits: a negative correlation with agreeableness (-.38) and conscientiousness (-.22), and a positive correlation with neuroticism (.32). Narcissistic (0.50), antisocial (0.36), borderline (0.50) and histrionic (0.45) traits are also strongly correlated with the passive-aggressive syndrome. How to recognize passive-aggressives? Although it is not a 100% sure way to identify them, it has been established that people with low levels of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability will generally engage in more passive-aggressive behavior. These indicators are often used to predict counterproductive behaviors at work, as in the Wally algorithm Hopwood CJ, Morey LC, Markowitz JC, Pinto A, Skodol AE, Gunderson JG, Zanarini MC, Shea MT, Yen S, McGlashan TH, Ansell EB, Grilo CM, Sanislow CA. The construct validity of passive-aggressive personality disorder. Psychiatry. 2009 Fall;72(3):256-67. doi: 10.1521/psyc.2009.72.3.256. PMID: 19821648; PMCID: PMC2862968. Impact in the workplace In the workplace context, passivity-aggression primarily refers to the hostility hidden behind behaviors that result in counterproductive responses in a work environment. Whether malicious or not, these behaviours interfere with relationships, interrupt the flow of work, cause unrest and spread negative feelings in the organization. In addition, the behaviors of a passive-aggressive employee negatively affect the overall productivity of a team. It is indeed very difficult, even depressing, to work with a colleague or boss who often acts in a passive-aggressive manner. Some people's use of passive-aggressive behaviors and displays is a face-to-face conflict avoidance tactic and a way in which they are more comfortable expressing their feelings of anger to their supervisor or colleagues. Stalling, procrastinating, using the silent treatment strategy, using sarcasm, or withholding information are common illustrations of behaviors that passive-aggressive employees engage in at the workplace. Here is a more comprehensive list of passive-aggressive manifestations: Deep sighs Silent treatment of a colleague Unintentional" misunderstanding Unintentional" forgetting to do the work Procrastination Poor quality of work Incongruence with the expected work Obstructionism Inaction Inefficiency Negative comments about others in their absence Betrayal ("backstabbing") Pretending to have been hurt Somatic complaints Long coffee breaks Intentional bitching Absenteeism Frequent late arrivals Petty theft Lack of loyalty Acts of revenge Sarcasm Sulking It is good to remember that we all have passive-aggressive attitudes at times, without necessarily intending to hurt. We just don't want to confront a person directly and we think we are doing the right thing. However, this is not a very healthy form of communication. Let's be careful in the workplace and in our personal relationships.

Happiness is a state of complete satisfaction and harmonious fulfillment, usually considered difficult to achieve. However, every day we are likely to experience moments of happiness. When these occur frequently, a person will tend to call himself happy. Since he or she is permanently happy with his or her lot, this person considers that he or she is enjoying what is called happiness. How can we achieve this? Is happiness due to favorable circumstances, or can we make the choice to be happy? A Harvard study published in 2015 (Grant Study on Happiness) tells us about the characteristics of people who say they are happier. Three main attitudes emerge from this decades-long study. Happy people: 1. choose to be happy in everything they do; 2. make an effort to strengthen their closest relationships; 3. take care of themselves physically, financially and emotionally. Choose to be happy in everything you do The correlation between happiness and occupation, income or wealth is much less than the correlation between happiness and what people think about their occupation, income or wealth. According to the Harvard study mentioned above, 47% of people who say they are very happy say they fully enjoy what they are doing now, compared to 14% of others. 62% of those who say they are very happy have not experienced and do not expect to experience a mid-life crisis, compared to 38% of others. 49% of those who say they are very happy say they are already pursuing their dreams, compared to 18% of others. 67% of those who say they are very happy say the happiest time of their life is now, compared to 20% of others. Strengthen your relationships with your loved ones The most important choice for happiness is to invest in your closest relationship, whether it's with your spouse, partner, parent, sibling or friend. Again, according to the happiness study, 75% of people who say they are very happy give the highest rating to the importance of success in their intimate relationships, compared to 49% of others. 77% of those who say they are very happy said the state of their relationships was either "excellent" or "very good," compared to 48% of others. Take care of yourself physically, financially and emotionally We all know that exercising and taking care of yourself is strongly correlated with good health, and that good health promotes happiness. But financial health and emotional well-being are equally important dimensions in finding the balance that will ensure our fulfillment. According to the Grant study results, 78% of people who say they are very happy report exercising at least three times a week, compared to 57% of those who do not (many of whom are likely to have lied...). 93% of those who say they are very happy say they are in excellent or very good physical health, compared to 74% of others. 68% of those who say they are very happy think they are "ready" for retirement or "on track", compared to 49% of others. 10% of those who say they are very happy perceive themselves as stressed, compared to 42% of others. 44% of those who say they are very happy say they are at peace with their work-life balance, compared to 13% of others. Implications for you as an individual 1. Choose happiness in everything you do. 2. Strengthen your closest relationships. 3. Take care of yourself physically, financially and emotionally. Implications for you as a leader 1. Focus on how your team members feel about what they are doing, even more than what they are doing. 2. Invest in relationships with your team members. 3. Invest in the physical, financial and emotional well-being of your team members. Ultimately, what the experience of happy people reveals is that it is not so much the right circumstances that bring happiness, but the choice we can all make to invite it into our lives. If you cultivate this mindset, you will stop searching for happiness and take the steps to create and share it.