Situation:

Hochriskante Position mit großem Impact. Entscheidungen basieren auf Bauchgefühl oder polierten Lebensläufen.

Symptome:

Unentschlossenheit oder Bias im Board, Misalignment zwischen Kandidatenbild und Rollenrealität, politische Spannungen im Auswahlprozess.

Herausforderung:

Fit jenseits von Kompetenzen sicherstellen, potenzielle Derailer aufdecken und eine transparente, strategische Auswahlentscheidung unterstützen.

Ziel:

Die richtige Person für die entscheidende Rolle finden – nicht nur die beeindruckendste.

Warum es wichtig ist:

An der Spitze zählen Persönlichkeitsrisiken mehr als Kompetenzlücken. Fehlbesetzungen sind extrem kostspielig und können die Organisation gefährden.

Lösung:

Tiefe Persönlichkeitsprofile, Führungsstil, Risikoverhalten und Cultural Fit einsetzen – mit klarem Fokus auf Verhalten unter Druck.

• Assessio MAP → Executive potential MAP focus
• CAPTain Test → makes work behavior visible
• Harrison Assessments → paradoxical leadership traits & risks
• Hogan HDS → derailers under pressure
• Hogan HPI → personality & leadership style
• Ixly, AKF → leadership drivers/values
• Pearson, Watson-Glaser CTA → critical thinking
• Profiles International, Profile XT™ → overall executive job fit

• L3: Executive Search – CEO & Top-Level-Auswahl
• Empfohlene Anbieter & Tools:
• Was Sie in diesem Guide finden
• 1. ÜBERBLICK ASSESSMENT-ANBIETER
• 1.1 Assessio
• 1.2 CNT Gesellschaften (CAPTain Test)
• 1.3 Harrison Assessments
• 1.4 Hogan Assessment Systems
• 1.5 Ixly
• 1.6 Pearson TalentLens
• 1.7 Profiles International
• 1.7 Anbieter-SWOT-Vergleichstabelle
• 2. ASSESSMENT-KATEGORIEN
• 2.1 Persönlichkeit & Führungskompetenz
• 2.2 Verhaltensderailer & Risikoverhalten
• 2.3 Kritisches Denken & Entscheidungsvermögen
• 2.4 Werte & Motivationstreiber
• 3. TECHNISCHE UMSETZUNG & COMPLIANCE
• 3.1 Übersicht Technische Umsetzung
• 3.2 Compliance & Integration
• 4. WISSENSCHAFTLICHE QUALITÄT
• 4.1 Vergleich Wissenschaftlicher Qualität
• 4.2 Glossar wissenschaftlicher Dimensionen
• Copyright & License Notice – Legal Action Reserved

2. ASSESSMENT-KATEGORIEN

Dieser Abschnitt ordnet die ausgewählten Assessment-Tools den zentralen Diagnostikbedarfen bei der Besetzung von Top-Positionen zu. Sie sind nach dem geordnet, was sie messen und warum das für die Executive Selection wichtig ist. Grundprinzip: Jede Kategorie beantwortet eine spezifische diagnostische Frage, die verschiedene Aspekte der Eignungsbeurteilung sichtbar macht. Die Kategorien sind ergänzende Perspektiven auf unterschiedliche Risikobereiche.

Assessio

MAP von Assessio measures work-contextualized Big Five personality traits and their underlying facets to assess behavioral tendencies in professional settings. The instrument captures five primary traits each broken down into five specific facets for a total of 25 granular dimensions:

• Extraversion: Sociability, Work Pace, Risk-Taking, Cheerfulness (Social Need, Social Image, Work Pace, Risk-Taking, Cheerfulness)
• Agreeableness: Trust, Diplomacy, Helpfulness, Compassion, Conflict Aversion (interpersonal style, cooperation, conflict management)
• Conscientiousness: Accountability, Structure, Ambition, Self-Discipline, Decision-Making (achievement orientation, organization, self-control)
• Emotional Stability: Unconcern, Mood Stability, Confidence, Self-Control, Stress Tolerance (emotional reactions, stress tolerance, mood stability)
• Openness: Imagination, Aesthetics, Self-Reflection, Variety, Mindset (openness to inner experiences and new experiences) Measurement occurs through normative assessment using a 4-point Likert format (disagree to agree) with trait and facet scores benchmarked against reference groups; the full 200-item version provides trait and facet profiles while the 75-item Essence version reports traits only.

MAP suits personnel selection requiring nuanced personality profiling, development initiatives needing detailed facet-level feedback, team composition analysis where specific interpersonal styles matter, and coaching contexts benefiting from work-relevant trait differentiation beyond broad domain scores.

Harrsion

Harrison Assessment von Harrison Assessments International measures job-specific behavioral suitability through comprehensive analysis of personality traits, work preferences, interests, motivations, and engagement factors to predict mutual fit between employee and employer expectations. The instrument captures 175 workplace-relevant factors including 12 proprietary Paradox pairs distinguishing genuine complementary strengths from potential derailers:

• Interpersonal: Confident Receptiveness, Self-Accepting Humility, Forthright Diplomacy, Helpful Assertiveness
• Achievement: Logical Intuition, Poised Achievement, Creative Persistence, Flexible Organizing
• Leadership: Mindful Courage, Compassionate Enforcing, Authoritative Collaboration, Realistic Optimism

Additional factors include task preferences, work environment preferences, interpersonal skills, motivations, values, and leadership capabilities.

Measurement occurs through preference-based questioning validated against 6,500+ job-specific success formulas with 8,200+ internal cross-references detecting inconsistency; Paradox Technology analyzes trait balance to determine if strong traits function as strengths or derailers and reveals stress-flip patterns where individuals shift to opposite behaviors under pressure. Harrison suits selection requiring job-specific fit prediction beyond generic personality profiling, engagement and retention forecasting through two-way expectation matching, leadership assessment needing derailer identification without negative questioning, development contexts requiring paradox-based coaching frameworks, and team composition analysis where behavioral complementarity matters for collaboration effectiveness.

Hogan

HPI (Hogan Personality Inventory) by Hogan Assessment measures bright-side personality characteristics reflecting how individuals behave on their best days and how they relate to others in normal workplace circumstances. The instrument captures seven primary personality dimensions with 41 total facets:

• Adjustment (emotional stability, stress tolerance, composure)
• Ambition (initiative, competitiveness, leadership drive)
• Sociability (extraversion, need for social interaction)
• Interpersonal Sensitivity (tact, perceptiveness, diplomacy)
• Prudence (conscientiousness, self-discipline, rule-following)
• Inquisitive (curiosity, learning orientation, creative thinking)
• Learning Approach (interest in staying current, intellectual engagement)

Additional six occupational scales include Service Orientation, Stress Tolerance, Reliability, Clerical Potential, Sales Potential, and Managerial Potential tailored to workplace contexts. Measurement employs 220 true/false items deliberately written at fourth-grade reading level with intentional ambiguity to reduce social desirability bias; scoring produces percentile ranks against normative reference groups based on the Five-Factor Model without faking detection scales, reflecting Hogan's position that minimal faking occurs in applied settings. HPI suits selection contexts requiring prediction of everyday workplace behavior and social effectiveness, leadership assessment needing insight into normal interpersonal style and achievement orientation, development programs focused on leveraging personality strengths rather than addressing derailers, and team composition where understanding typical behavioral tendencies aids collaboration and role assignment.

Profiles International

Profile XT von Profiles International (acquired by Wiley) measures total person job fit through integrated assessment of cognitive abilities, behavioral traits, and occupational interests to predict whether candidates can do the job, will do it, and will be happy doing it. The instrument captures three assessment dimensions:

• Thinking & Reasoning (5 cognitive abilities): Learning Index (general mental agility), Verbal Skill (vocabulary comprehension), Verbal Reasoning (logical analysis of language-based problems), Numerical Ability (basic mathematical competency), Numerical Reasoning (quantitative data analysis)
• Behavioral Traits (9 personality dimensions): Energy Level, Assertiveness, Sociability, Manageability, Attitude (optimism), Decisiveness, Accommodating (flexibility), Independence, Objective Judgment
• Occupational Interests (6 RIASEC-adapted categories): Enterprising, People Service, Technical, Mechanical, Creative, Financial/Administrative

Measurement employs approximately 60-minute mixed-format assessment with multiple-choice cognitive items, Likert-scale personality statements, and interest preference ratings; scoring compares individual profiles against customizable Performance Models (benchmarks) created through top performer analysis, expert judgment, or hybrid approaches tailored by organization/position/manager/geography, producing quantified job fit percentages (0-100%) with gap analysis identifying specific scales falling outside target ranges.

Profile XT suits mid-market organizations needing comprehensive assessment without enterprise complexity, high-volume hiring requiring efficient screening and objective candidate comparison, multi-position environments where flexible job-matching and customizable benchmarks provide value, internal mobility programs using multi-job fit analysis for career pathing, succession planning identifying advancement readiness based on role requirements, and team building through behavioral diversity analysis and complementarity assessment.

A manufacturing conglomerate recruiting a CEO to lead post-merger integration selected a finalist with impressive credentials managing collaborative transformations at previous organizations, demonstrating stakeholder engagement expertise that seemed perfect for uniting two historically independent business units into cohesive enterprise.

The board deployed Harrison Assessment discovering paradox imbalances that explained why this collaborative strength might become catastrophic weakness in their specific context. The candidate showed Passive Imbalance on Helpful Assertiveness with extremely high helpfulness paired with minimal assertiveness, meaning his stakeholder engagement approach prioritized relationship harmony over difficult strategic conversations, withholding critical decisions when they risked disappointing constituent groups rather than making necessary but unpopular calls.

His Logical Intuition profile revealed Aggressive Imbalance with high analytical thinking but weak intuitive judgment, requiring comprehensive data for decisions that in merger contexts demanded speed and pattern recognition based on incomplete information. Most problematic was Passive Imbalance on Authoritative Collaboration showing strong consensus preference with minimal unilateral authority, creating decision paralysis when the business units inevitably disagreed on strategic direction since he couldn’t make executive calls without achieving impossible unanimity.

Harrison’s stress-flip analysis revealed that under integration pressure, his helpful diplomacy would flip to conflict-avoiding evasiveness, his analytical thoroughness would escalate to paralyzing over-analysis demanding unobtainable certainty, and his collaborative instinct would manifest as abdication waiting for consensus that would never emerge while competitive dynamics between legacy organizations intensified. The assessment predicted he would Excel at building relationships and gathering input but fail catastrophically at making tough integration calls that required overriding constituent preferences for enterprise benefit.

A professional services firm promoted their CFO to CEO based on a decade of operational excellence—improved margins, successful technology implementations, and stakeholder confidence in his analytical rigor. Within six months, strategic execution stalled as the board noticed the new CEO micromanaging initiatives he’d previously delegated effectively, bottlenecking decisions while pursuing impossible comprehensiveness, and alienating the leadership team through dismissive responses to input he interpreted as insufficiently rigorous.

They deployed Hogan HPI and MAP to understand what changed, discovering personality patterns that functioned as strengths in CFO contexts but became liabilities at enterprise level. HPI showed his Prudence score in the 85th percentile with high Mastery, Virtuous, and Impulse Control facets that drove his CFO success through meticulous financial oversight and risk management, but at CEO level this manifested as inability to delegate strategic initiatives without exhaustive control, paralyzing organizational agility.

HOGAN

HDS (Hogan Development Survey) von Hogan Assessment Systems measures dark-side personality characteristics—overused strengths and behavioral tendencies that emerge under stress, pressure, boredom, or complacency to impede relationships, derail careers, and undermine team effectiveness. The instrument identifies 11 derailer dimensions organized into three interpersonal movement patterns:

• Moving Away: Excitable (moodiness), Skeptical (cynicism), Cautious (risk aversion), Reserved (social detachment), Leisurely (passive resistance)
• Moving Against: Bold (arrogance), Mischievous (rule-breaking), Colorful (attention-seeking)
• Moving Toward: Imaginative (eccentric thinking), Diligent (perfectionism), Dutiful (over-compliance)

Each dimension contains three subscales yielding 33 granular risk indicators that distinguish between normal everyday behavior and stress-triggered derailment patterns. Measurement employs 168 agree/disagree items inspired by DSM-IV personality disorder criteria adapted for non-clinical workplace contexts; scoring produces percentile ranks interpreted through risk bands (0-39 No Risk, 40-69 Low Risk, 70-89 Moderate Risk, 90-100 High Risk) where higher scores indicate greater derailment potential when individual strengths become overplayed liabilities.

HDS suits executive selection requiring identification of career-limiting behaviors before they manifest, leadership development focused on self-awareness of stress responses and interpersonal blind spots, succession planning needing assessment of long-term derailment risk, team composition where understanding complementary versus conflicting derailer profiles prevents dysfunction, and coaching contexts requiring specific behavioral change targets beyond generic personality development.

A technology company recruited an external CEO with successful turnaround credentials leading innovation-driven transformations at previous organizations, demonstrating the bold strategic vision the board believed necessary to revitalize stagnant market position. Within eighteen months, the company experienced unprecedented executive turnover as talented leaders departed citing impossible demands, strategic whiplash from constant direction changes, and dismissive treatment when raising implementation concerns. The board deployed Hogan HDS discovering derailer patterns explaining the catastrophic cultural destruction despite the CEO’s impressive strategic thinking.

His HDS showed Bold at 92nd percentile with high risk across all three subscales—Entitled showing expectation of special treatment and impatience with normal constraints, Bold Arrogant revealing confidence morphing into arrogance dismissing others’ expertise, and Domineering displaying need to control conversations and decisions. This Bold pattern meant his strategic confidence under normal conditions escalated to arrogance under challenge, interpreting questioning as disloyalty rather than legitimate concern, destroying psychological safety required for executives to surface implementation obstacles. His Mischievous at 88th percentile with high Risk-Taking and Impulsive subscales explained constant strategic pivots—he grew bored with execution phase pursuing novel initiatives before previous strategies could demonstrate results, creating organizational exhaustion.

Excitable at 75th percentile revealed volatility where enthusiasm for new directions transformed to frustration when reality proved more complex than envisioned, with Volatile Emotions and Hard to Please subscales showing mood swings that paralyzed leadership team since they couldn’t predict which strategic direction would receive support versus dismissal. The HDS pattern showed classic Moving Against derailer cluster where his Bold arrogance triggered others’ Skeptical cynicism creating doom loops as resistance confirmed his view that execution team lacked capability, while his Mischievous impulsivity prevented strategic coherence, and Excitable volatility made planning impossible since priorities shifted with his emotional state. The assessment revealed his turnaround credentials came from situations requiring dramatic vision to escape crisis where his derailers functioned as strengths, but in stabilization contexts requiring execution discipline, those same patterns became catastrophic.

Pearson TalentLens

Watson-Glaser CTA (Critical Thinking Appraisal) by Pearson TalentLens measures critical thinking ability and logical reasoning skills essential for evaluating information objectively, analyzing arguments, and making sound decisions in professional contexts. The instrument captures five critical thinking dimensions: — Recognition of Assumptions: Identifying unstated premises underlying statements — Evaluation of Arguments: Distinguishing strong evidence-based reasoning from weak emotional appeals — Making Inferences: Drawing logical conclusions from presented data without overreaching — Deduction: Determining whether conclusions necessarily follow from given premises — Interpretation: Evaluating evidence quality to decide if conclusions are warranted Measurement employs approximately 30-minute scenario-based assessment using written passages describing business situations or general topics followed by multiple-choice questions testing specific reasoning skills; scoring produces criterion-referenced evaluation of logical reasoning ability with norm-referenced percentile ranks comparing performance against professional/managerial populations to predict decision-making quality and job performance. Watson-Glaser suits selection for roles requiring analytical rigor and evidence-based judgment (management, consulting, legal, finance, technical positions), graduate program admissions needing assessment of academic reasoning capacity, leadership development programs focused on improving strategic thinking and bias awareness, succession planning identifying candidates with reasoning capability for complex decision-making roles, and organizational contexts where distinguishing between candidates with similar credentials requires objective evaluation of critical thinking beyond educational credentials or interview performance.

CNT Gesellschaften

CAPTain by CNT Gesellschaften measures work behavior, management competencies, and leadership potential through criterion-referenced assessment benchmarking against empirically-derived requirement profiles capturing observable behavioral patterns directly relevant to operational work contexts. The instrument captures 34-38 behavioral dimensions across six domains: — Work Performance: Einstellung zur Arbeit, Zielorientierung, Persönliche Beteiligung, Selbstorganisation, Detailorientierung, Arbeitstempo, Ausdauer, Selbstständigkeit, Arbeitsplanung, Bedürfnis nach Abwechslung, Beständigkeit — Leadership Characteristics: Führungsstärke, Delegation, Einflussnahme, Autoritätsorientierung — Decision Making: Entscheidungsfreude — Personality: Selbstbehauptung, Ambitionen, Selbstbeherrschung, Veränderungskraft, Realist, Fitness — Team Behavior: Bedürfnis nach Konsens, Anerkennungsbedürfnis, Bedürfnis nach Aufmerksamkeit, Kontaktorientierung, Gruppenorientierung, Kooperation — Basic Potentials: Führungsrolle, Basisführungspotenzial, Basisverkaufspotenzial, Kreativität, Unterstützungsbedarf, Gründlichkeit, Aktivitätsniveau, Technische Orientierung, Selbstvertrauen, Kontaktfreude Measurement employs forced-choice item pairs minimizing social desirability bias plus optional Likert-scale self-rating enabling discrepancy analysis between self-perception and behavioral tendency; criterion-referenced scoring benchmarks individual behavior against middle operational management requirement profile with optional client-specific success profiles generated from empirical high/low performer analysis; produces detailed behavioral competency reports with graphical visualization. CAPTain suits personnel selection requiring role-fit assessment, leadership development identifying competency gaps, succession planning evaluating management readiness, training evaluation measuring behavioral change, and assessment center integration providing objective behavioral baseline data.

A consumer goods company promoted their Director of Strategy to Chief Strategy Officer based on impressive presentation skills, stakeholder relationships, and strategic narrative development that won board approval for multiple initiatives. Within a year, the CEO noticed concerning patterns—strategies that sounded compelling in presentations consistently failed to deliver projected results, competitive analysis missed obvious threats that less senior analysts identified, and strategic recommendations shifted based on last conversation rather than systematic evaluation.

The company deployed Watson-Glaser CTA discovering catastrophic gaps in critical thinking masked by the executive’s confident communication. His overall Watson-Glaser score placed him at the 15th percentile for professional populations, with particularly weak performance on Recognition of Assumptions showing inability to identify unstated premises underlying strategic arguments, and Evaluation of Arguments revealing he couldn’t distinguish strong evidence-based reasoning from superficially compelling but logically flawed claims. His Making Inferences subscale at the 8th percentile showed he drew conclusions that didn’t logically follow from available data, essentially pattern-matching to expectations rather than reasoning from evidence. The Deduction dimension revealed he frequently endorsed conclusions that sounded plausible but didn’t necessarily follow from stated premises, while Interpretation showed he consistently over-interpreted ambiguous information as supporting his preferred strategic direction.

Ixly

AKF (Adaptive Career Values Questionnaire) von Ixly measures career values and work motivation drivers through forced-choice comparison methodology revealing authentic motivational hierarchies rather than socially desirable aspirations. The instrument captures 20 career value dimensions across four categories:

• Work-Life Balance: Energy allocation between work and private life
• Outcomes (Wofür tun Sie es?): Finanzielle Belohnung (financial reward/income), Wertschätzung und Anerkennung (appreciation/recognition), Konkrete Resultate (tangible/visible results), Sinnvoller Beitrag (meaningful contribution to others), Karriere (career advancement/status/comparison with others), Qualität (high quality standards for own work)
• Activities (Was machen Sie gern?): Kreativ denken (creative/innovative work, developing new ideas), Einfluss ausüben (influencing processes/people/groups), Unternehmen (initiating actions/projects/ventures), Anderen helfen (helping others, providing service), Analysieren (complex problem-solving, analytical thinking), Entwickeln (personal development, continuous learning), Körperlich aktiv sein (physical work, hands-on activities)
• Environment (Was bietet Ihnen die Umgebung?): Autonomie (self-determination/independence), Sicherheit und Stabilität (security and stability), Herausfordernde Aufgaben (challenge, new/varied tasks), Zusammenarbeit (teamwork, being part of community), Profilierung (visibility, being in spotlight, status), Dynamik (busy pace, high workload environment)

Measurement employs ipsative forced-choice questionnaire requiring candidates to compare career value pairs revealing relative importance rankings that resist social desirability inflation; categorization into Primary Motivators (essential for satisfaction, Sten 7-10), Secondary Motivators (enriching framework conditions, Sten 5-6), Neutral Motivators (can function without, Sten 4-5), and Demotivators (actively draining to avoid, Sten 1-3) identifies which work characteristics energize versus deplete individual motivation; risk factor flagging per high-scoring value reveals potential dissatisfaction sources when role cannot provide key motivators. AKF suits selection contexts requiring motivational fit assessment beyond capability evaluation, succession planning identifying whether internal candidates genuinely want promoted responsibilities or accept from obligation, retention risk analysis revealing which valued employees have motivational profiles incompatible with organizational evolution, development conversations grounding career planning in authentic drivers rather than assumed aspirations, and team composition understanding motivational diversity that enables or threatens collaboration.

Profiles International

Profile XT by Profiles International (acquired by Wiley) measures total person job fit through integrated assessment of cognitive abilities, behavioral traits, and occupational interests to predict whether candidates can do the job, will do it, and will be happy doing it. The instrument captures three assessment dimensions: — Thinking & Reasoning (5 cognitive abilities): Learning Index (general mental agility), Verbal Skill (vocabulary comprehension), Verbal Reasoning (logical analysis of language-based problems), Numerical Ability (basic mathematical competency), Numerical Reasoning (quantitative data analysis) — Behavioral Traits (9 personality dimensions): Energy Level, Assertiveness, Sociability, Manageability, Attitude (optimism), Decisiveness, Accommodating (flexibility), Independence, Objective Judgment — Occupational Interests (6 RIASEC-adapted categories): Enterprising, People Service, Technical, Mechanical, Creative, Financial/Administrative Measurement employs approximately 60-minute mixed-format assessment with multiple-choice cognitive items, Likert-scale personality statements, and interest preference ratings; scoring compares individual profiles against customizable Performance Models (benchmarks) created through top performer analysis, expert judgment, or hybrid approaches tailored by organization/position/manager/geography, producing quantified job fit percentages (0-100%) with gap analysis identifying specific scales falling outside target ranges. Profile XT suits mid-market organizations needing comprehensive assessment without enterprise complexity, high-volume hiring requiring efficient screening and objective candidate comparison, multi-position environments where flexible job-matching and customizable benchmarks provide value, internal mobility programs using multi-job fit analysis for career pathing, succession planning identifying advancement readiness based on role requirements, and team building through behavioral diversity analysis and complementarity assessment.

A financial services firm invested heavily developing their high-potential CFO through executive education, board exposure, and strategic project leadership preparing succession to CEO when the current executive retired. Despite stellar performance reviews and successful project delivery, eighteen months into the succession preparation program the CFO submitted resignation having accepted CEO role at smaller competitor.

The shocked board deployed AKF retrospectively on leadership team discovering values patterns that predicted the departure they’d failed to anticipate. The departing CFO’s AKF profile showed Primary Motivators of Autonomy at Sten 9, Managing at Sten 8, and Financial Reward at Sten 8, while Security measured as Demotivator at Sten 2 and Structure measured as Demotivator at Sten 2. This pattern revealed someone intrinsically motivated by independent decision authority, direct leadership control, and substantial financial upside, while actively demotivated by stability-focused cultures and hierarchical structures.

The firm’s values profile showed opposite configuration—Primary Motivators of Security, Structure, and Tradition reflecting conservative financial services culture prioritizing stability, established procedures, and incremental change, with Autonomy and Innovation as Demotivators since the culture valued consensus and risk management over independent bold moves. The values misalignment explained his departure—despite intellectual readiness for CEO role, the three-year succession timeline represented extended period in organization whose core values actively demotivated him, while competitor offer provided immediate Autonomy fulfilling his strongest driver, smaller organization enabling greater Managing scope, and entrepreneurial culture matching his Innovation preference at Sten 7. Most telling was his Growth motivator at Sten 9 showing he valued developmental challenge, and the bureaucratic succession process felt like career stagnation rather than growth despite objective skill building.

The AKF analysis revealed the firm had focused entirely on capability development ignoring motivational fit, essentially preparing someone with entrepreneurial values for role in conservative culture he found fundamentally demotivating. The board used these insights to revise succession approach, prioritizing internal candidates whose AKF profiles showed Security, Structure, and Relationships as Primary Motivators indicating intrinsic cultural fit, and recruiting externally for CFO role from candidates whose values matched the organizational culture rather than continuing pattern of developing high-potential candidates whose values predicted eventual departure regardless of investment in their capabilities.

Assessio

Webbasierte Plattformverwaltung über Assessio Select mit Unterstützung für Präsenz- oder Remote-Durchführung, beaufsichtigt oder unbeaufsichtigt. Automatische Bewertung erzeugt standardisierte schriftliche Feedback-Reports. MAP 3.0 (Februar 2024–März 2025) mit systematischer DIF-Elimination für minimalen Adverse Impact. Forschungsbasierte Normen für Komplett-MAP, globale Normen für Essence-Version. Übersetzungsprotokoll nutzt Vorwärts-Rückwärts-Überarbeitungs-Validierungsmethodik. DSGVO-konforme EU-Datensicherheit.

CNT Gesellschaften

Webbasiertes Testmanagementsystem mit integriertem Bewerbermanagement-System (BMS), optionale IT-Schnittstellen zu externen ATS. DIN 33430-konform für deutsche Personalauswahlstandards. Kriteriumsreferenzierter Ansatz ermöglicht klientenspezifisches Erfolgsprofiling durch empirische High-vs.-Low-Performer-Analyse. Statische Report-Generierung mit automatischer Bewertung. Nicht mobiloptimiert. Zertifizierungstraining erforderlich. Reports auf Deutsch, Englisch, Russisch und Spanisch. Dokumentierte Kandidatenakzeptanz: 88% Bewertung als nutzerfreundlich. Test-Retest-Reliabilität r=.638.

Harrison Assessments International

Webbasierte Plattform mit 1.600+ stellenspezifischen Anforderungsprofilen. Psychometrische Eigenschaften: 175+ Merkmale, branchenvalidiert; ISO 10667 / DIN 33430-konform. Integration: ATS/BMS via XML-Schnittstelle. Daten-Hosting: AWS-Infrastruktur, ISO 27001-zertifiziert, DSGVO-konform. Lizenzmodell: Pay-per-Report oder monatliche Flatrate.

Hogan Assessment Systems

DSGVO-konform für die EU; Server in Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA. Online-Plattform erfordert zertifizierten Zugang über Hogan. API- und HRIS-Konnektivität für Enterprise-Einsatz verfügbar. Automatisiertes Reporting mit dem weltweit größten Archiv arbeitspsychologischer Forschung. Zertifizierung obligatorisch. Globale Verfügbarkeit in 50+ Ländern, 40+ Sprachen. 75% der Fortune-500-Unternehmen als Referenzen.

Ixly

Online-adaptive Plattform, webbasiert. Hauptsitz Utrecht, Niederlande, Expansion in Deutschland und EU. Modulares Ökosystem für flexible Diagnostik mit proprietären und lizenzierten Instrumenten. DSGVO-konforme EU-Datensicherheit. Sprachunterstützung: Niederländisch, Deutsch, Englisch, Französisch, Polnisch. Ipsative Forced-Choice-Methodik minimiert soziale Erwünschtheit. Über 600 Kundenorganisationen.

Pearson TalentLens

Teil der globalen Bildungsgruppe Pearson PLC, Hauptsitz London. Sichere Testplattform mit beaufsichtigter und unbeaufsichtigter Durchführung. Globale Reichweite mit etablierter wissenschaftlicher Validierung. Kulturfreie kognitive Maße unterstützen internationalen Einsatz. Watson-Glaser CTA: kriteriumsreferenziert + normreferenziert gegen professionelle und managerielle Populationen. Publisher-Qualifikation für Administratoren erforderlich. Referenzen: PwC, öffentlicher Dienst, Anwaltskanzleien.

Disclaimer

Alle Inhalte auf peats.ai basieren auf öffentlich verfügbaren Informationen, KI-gestützter Recherche und mehr als 15 Jahren Erfahrung im HR-Diagnostikmarkt.

Anbieter können Korrekturen oder Aktualisierungen jederzeit an [jennifer.frotscher@peats.de] senden, damit wir die Inhalte aktuell halten können.

Unternehmensinformationen

PEATS GmbH · Lisztstraße 6c, 22763 Hamburg

Geschäftsführerin: Jennifer Julie Frotscher

Handelsregister: HRB 124838, Amtsgericht Hamburg

Kontakt: Jennifer.Frotscher@peats.de

Zuletzt aktualisiert: Mai 2025