- Email: [email protected]
CEOs: A handwriting analysis
CEOs: A Handwriting Analysis
D a v i d L. Kurtz, C. Patrick Fleenor, Louis E. B o o n e , a n d Virginia M. Rider I
I
I
II
David L. Kurtz holds the R. A. and Vivian
Young Chair of Business Administration at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. C. Patrick Fleenor is the Robert D. O'Brien Professor of Management at Seattle University. Louis E. Boone is the Ernest G. Cleverdon Professor of Business and Management at the University of South Alabama, Mobile. As part of their continuing analysis of the characteristics of our country's top CEOs, they have enlisted the help of Virginia M. Rider, a certified graphologist and founder of Handwriting Consultants of Bellevue, Washington.
I
I
I
Lance Morrow said, "Handwriting is civilization's casual encephalogram." Our nation's CEOs have been found to share many characteristics. Is handwriting style one of them? This CEO is able to simplify tasks and is well organized. However, there are times when he should spend more time planning before he takes action. This person exhibits leadership ability and is good with numbers and details. His communication ability is not as good as his numerical abilities, and he knows it. He does let in new ideas. Material drives are prominent in this profile. This person is an aggressive workhorse who is stubborn and has a hard time relaxing. above profile is a certified graphologist s assessment of one of the nation's leading CEOs. It illustrates the depth of information that can be obtained from a handwriting specimen. Graphology, scientific handwriting analysis, has been used in a variety of ways, ranging from psychological evaluation to jury choice to personnel selection. In Germany it is even taught as a subdivision of psychology. There are several approaches to evaluating a person's handwriting. Most of these systems look at handT h e
writing features such as size, slant, regularity, margin, pressure, lines, connection, and word and line spacing. The majority of these features remain constant over time. However, each person's handwriting also contains individualized "i-dots," "t-bars," loops, hooks, and so forth--strokes linked to various personality traits. MANAGERIAL
U S E S OF
GRAPHOLOGY analysis has been Handwriting used for a variety of business purposes. Banks have used it to evaluate credit risks and to determine the potential compatibility of a business partnership. Graphology has also been utilized extensively in the personnel field to evaluate job applicants and match people to specific jobs and coworkers. As many as 3,000 U.S. firms employ graphology in some form or another. However, since the public is often suspicious of handwriting analysis, many firms do not admit its use by management. Companies known to have used graphology in personnel selection include Ford, General Electric, Mutual of Omaha, H & R Block,
41
Business Horizons / January-February1989 i
ii
i
"Rider concluded that all of the CEOs were similar in their ability to simplify tasks. With a few exceptions, most of them were also well organized. Nearly all of the executives were good with numbers, and the majority exhibited creative traits." 42 Firestone, USX Corp., and Northwest Mutual Life Insurance, among others. Is Gral~hology an Effective Management Tool?
Research on the accuracy of graphology assessment has been mixed. Some studies have shown graphology to be a reliable predictor of personality when compared to other psychological tests and respondents' own assessments. 2 Others have concluded that graphology is inaccurate and ineffective. In one study, twenty graphologists assessed 103 subjects with two handwriting samples each. Although this project showed evidence of reliability between raters, there was no evidence of validity. 3 Is graphology an effective management tool? Probably the best answer is that despite contradictory studies, U.S. industry continues to use it in many crucial business decision areas. ANALYSIS OF CEOS' HANDWRITING
he authors of this article became interested in graphology while building a data bank of information on 243 of the nation's leading chief executive officers. This research effort collected information on the CEOs' family background, social class, personal characteristics and habits, marriages, religion, education, early signs of a business career, leisure activities, and managerial style. The data were obtained from a de-
T
tailed research instrument that the CEOs were asked to complete. The authors soon realized that they had not only built a comprehensive data bank on these executives; they also possessed a unique collection of handwriting specimens. The question was what to do with these samples. One of the data bank questions concerned management style. The executives were asked to categorize themselves as a Theory X (autocratic), Theory Y (participative), or Theory Z (consensus builder) leader. The bulk of our respondents classified themselves as Theory Y adherents. The limitations of the self-reporting mechanism were soon evident. For example, one CEO, whose reputation was known to the authors, reported that he was a participative, Theory Y leader. By contrast, few people who had ever worked for this man would have called him participative. This observation led to a suggestion to compare samples of the handwriting of CEOs falling into the Theory X, Y, and Z categories. Virginia Rider, a certified graphologist who had worked on the notorious Hillside Strangler case, agreed to work on this task. She was not familiar with the management literature and was unaware of the meaning of Theories X, Y, and Z. We selected 28 questionnaires on the basis of the amount of handwriting that was available for analysis. The specimens were grouped by management style but were coded so they could not be identified as either The-
ory X, Y, or Z. The names, company affiliations, and management style responses were removed from the samples the analyst was given. Rider was first asked to try to spot similar personality traits among all three groups of CEOs. She was then requested to construct a profile of each of the three groups. The intent here was to compare her analysis with the common perceptions of the managerial styles. Finally, Rider was asked to comment on each individual specimen. The minimal number of samples limited her evaluation, and no doubt some traits were not identified, but the results of this analysis were quite interesting. WHAT DID THE GRAPHOLOGIST FIND?
n answer to the first question, Rider concluded that all of the CEOs were simi!ar in their ability to simplify tasks. With a few exceptions, most of them were also well organized. Nearly all of the executives were good with numbers, and the majority exhibited creative traits. As one might expect, intellectual formations were evident in many of the specimens. Rider also discovered many workhorses, or people who do what it takes to get the job done. She noted that this was particularly common in the group coded for Theory Y managers. Another interesting point concerned the CEOs' sense of humor. Most of our respondents said that people considered them humorous.
I
CEOs: A Handwriting Analysis i
By contrast, Rider could find few examples of humor in the samples she studied. Remember the old adage-laugh at the boss's jokes whether they are funny or not!
Group Profiles When the samples were uncoded, the following management style profiles resulted. Theory X. This group showed a strong tendency to persevere, sticking to a job until the goal is achieved. There was some indication that members of this group feel the need to surpass society's standards, or prove their superiority. Theory Y. This group appeared to be the most dynamic. Some of its members can be flamboyant, and are able to project themselves well. These CEOs are the movers and the shakers, with an excess of energy. But because they are driven, they have a tendency to drive others also. Theory Y leaders have difficulty leaving w o r k - - o r relaxing w h e n they do leave. Some are driven by money and luxury needs, some by the need for approval from others. Theory Z. This group showed the fewest visible signs of leadership abil-
ity. Less forceful in their approach, these executives give great attention to details and are content behind the scenes. They are rarely found on center stage and are probably more humble. H o w Did the Analyst Do? On balance, our coauthor hit the mark on many of the personality traits identified with the three m a n a g e m e n t styles. It was particularly interesting to note her conclusion that Theory Y proponents were the most dynamic leaders, while Theory Z advocates showed less leadership ability.
i
i
o u r knowledge, this is the first T o [time anyone has ever analyzed . i , the handwriting of so many CEOs. While many will argue that graphology is not an exact science, this exercise has proven it a credible predictor of self-reported management style. The handwriting profiles of the three groups of specimens bear remarkable resemblance to the way Theories X, Y, and Z are described in the management literature. []
43
Individual Profiles Rider went on to develop individual profiles of the 28 CEOs. Her comments varied with the extent of the specimen she had available. These individual profiles were fascinating because they illustrated many similarities among those who have risen to the top of the corporate hierarchy. Nearly all of the 28 CEOs can simplify tasks that confront them. Most of them are also well organized, good with numbers, and very creative. This list of traits would seem to support many of the conclusions of classical studies of management behavior.
1. Larry Liebman, "As a Business Tool, Graphoanalysis Still Fights Occult Stigma," Puget Sound Business Journal, February 18, 1988, p. 17; Michael J. McCarthy, "Handwriting Analysis as Personnel Tool," The Wail Street Journal, August 25, 1988, p. 19; and Marion Chesney, "Graphoanalysis--Choosing the 'Write' Person--Over 1500 Firms are Now Using It in Personnel Selection," Management World, March 1978, pp. 3-7. 2. "Reading Between the Lines--What Your Handwriting Reveals," Credit & Financial Management, January 1979, pp. 14-15, 38. 3. Anat Rofaeli and Richard J. Klimoski, "'Predicting Sales Success Through Handwriting Analysis: An Evaluation of the Effects of Training and Handwriting Sample Content," Journal of Applied Psychology, May 1983, pp. 212217.
D a v i d L. Kurtz, C. Patrick Fleenor, Louis E. B o o n e , a n d Virginia M. Rider I
I
I
II
David L. Kurtz holds the R. A. and Vivian
Young Chair of Business Administration at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. C. Patrick Fleenor is the Robert D. O'Brien Professor of Management at Seattle University. Louis E. Boone is the Ernest G. Cleverdon Professor of Business and Management at the University of South Alabama, Mobile. As part of their continuing analysis of the characteristics of our country's top CEOs, they have enlisted the help of Virginia M. Rider, a certified graphologist and founder of Handwriting Consultants of Bellevue, Washington.
I
I
I
Lance Morrow said, "Handwriting is civilization's casual encephalogram." Our nation's CEOs have been found to share many characteristics. Is handwriting style one of them? This CEO is able to simplify tasks and is well organized. However, there are times when he should spend more time planning before he takes action. This person exhibits leadership ability and is good with numbers and details. His communication ability is not as good as his numerical abilities, and he knows it. He does let in new ideas. Material drives are prominent in this profile. This person is an aggressive workhorse who is stubborn and has a hard time relaxing. above profile is a certified graphologist s assessment of one of the nation's leading CEOs. It illustrates the depth of information that can be obtained from a handwriting specimen. Graphology, scientific handwriting analysis, has been used in a variety of ways, ranging from psychological evaluation to jury choice to personnel selection. In Germany it is even taught as a subdivision of psychology. There are several approaches to evaluating a person's handwriting. Most of these systems look at handT h e
writing features such as size, slant, regularity, margin, pressure, lines, connection, and word and line spacing. The majority of these features remain constant over time. However, each person's handwriting also contains individualized "i-dots," "t-bars," loops, hooks, and so forth--strokes linked to various personality traits. MANAGERIAL
U S E S OF
GRAPHOLOGY analysis has been Handwriting used for a variety of business purposes. Banks have used it to evaluate credit risks and to determine the potential compatibility of a business partnership. Graphology has also been utilized extensively in the personnel field to evaluate job applicants and match people to specific jobs and coworkers. As many as 3,000 U.S. firms employ graphology in some form or another. However, since the public is often suspicious of handwriting analysis, many firms do not admit its use by management. Companies known to have used graphology in personnel selection include Ford, General Electric, Mutual of Omaha, H & R Block,
41
Business Horizons / January-February1989 i
ii
i
"Rider concluded that all of the CEOs were similar in their ability to simplify tasks. With a few exceptions, most of them were also well organized. Nearly all of the executives were good with numbers, and the majority exhibited creative traits." 42 Firestone, USX Corp., and Northwest Mutual Life Insurance, among others. Is Gral~hology an Effective Management Tool?
Research on the accuracy of graphology assessment has been mixed. Some studies have shown graphology to be a reliable predictor of personality when compared to other psychological tests and respondents' own assessments. 2 Others have concluded that graphology is inaccurate and ineffective. In one study, twenty graphologists assessed 103 subjects with two handwriting samples each. Although this project showed evidence of reliability between raters, there was no evidence of validity. 3 Is graphology an effective management tool? Probably the best answer is that despite contradictory studies, U.S. industry continues to use it in many crucial business decision areas. ANALYSIS OF CEOS' HANDWRITING
he authors of this article became interested in graphology while building a data bank of information on 243 of the nation's leading chief executive officers. This research effort collected information on the CEOs' family background, social class, personal characteristics and habits, marriages, religion, education, early signs of a business career, leisure activities, and managerial style. The data were obtained from a de-
T
tailed research instrument that the CEOs were asked to complete. The authors soon realized that they had not only built a comprehensive data bank on these executives; they also possessed a unique collection of handwriting specimens. The question was what to do with these samples. One of the data bank questions concerned management style. The executives were asked to categorize themselves as a Theory X (autocratic), Theory Y (participative), or Theory Z (consensus builder) leader. The bulk of our respondents classified themselves as Theory Y adherents. The limitations of the self-reporting mechanism were soon evident. For example, one CEO, whose reputation was known to the authors, reported that he was a participative, Theory Y leader. By contrast, few people who had ever worked for this man would have called him participative. This observation led to a suggestion to compare samples of the handwriting of CEOs falling into the Theory X, Y, and Z categories. Virginia Rider, a certified graphologist who had worked on the notorious Hillside Strangler case, agreed to work on this task. She was not familiar with the management literature and was unaware of the meaning of Theories X, Y, and Z. We selected 28 questionnaires on the basis of the amount of handwriting that was available for analysis. The specimens were grouped by management style but were coded so they could not be identified as either The-
ory X, Y, or Z. The names, company affiliations, and management style responses were removed from the samples the analyst was given. Rider was first asked to try to spot similar personality traits among all three groups of CEOs. She was then requested to construct a profile of each of the three groups. The intent here was to compare her analysis with the common perceptions of the managerial styles. Finally, Rider was asked to comment on each individual specimen. The minimal number of samples limited her evaluation, and no doubt some traits were not identified, but the results of this analysis were quite interesting. WHAT DID THE GRAPHOLOGIST FIND?
n answer to the first question, Rider concluded that all of the CEOs were simi!ar in their ability to simplify tasks. With a few exceptions, most of them were also well organized. Nearly all of the executives were good with numbers, and the majority exhibited creative traits. As one might expect, intellectual formations were evident in many of the specimens. Rider also discovered many workhorses, or people who do what it takes to get the job done. She noted that this was particularly common in the group coded for Theory Y managers. Another interesting point concerned the CEOs' sense of humor. Most of our respondents said that people considered them humorous.
I
CEOs: A Handwriting Analysis i
By contrast, Rider could find few examples of humor in the samples she studied. Remember the old adage-laugh at the boss's jokes whether they are funny or not!
Group Profiles When the samples were uncoded, the following management style profiles resulted. Theory X. This group showed a strong tendency to persevere, sticking to a job until the goal is achieved. There was some indication that members of this group feel the need to surpass society's standards, or prove their superiority. Theory Y. This group appeared to be the most dynamic. Some of its members can be flamboyant, and are able to project themselves well. These CEOs are the movers and the shakers, with an excess of energy. But because they are driven, they have a tendency to drive others also. Theory Y leaders have difficulty leaving w o r k - - o r relaxing w h e n they do leave. Some are driven by money and luxury needs, some by the need for approval from others. Theory Z. This group showed the fewest visible signs of leadership abil-
ity. Less forceful in their approach, these executives give great attention to details and are content behind the scenes. They are rarely found on center stage and are probably more humble. H o w Did the Analyst Do? On balance, our coauthor hit the mark on many of the personality traits identified with the three m a n a g e m e n t styles. It was particularly interesting to note her conclusion that Theory Y proponents were the most dynamic leaders, while Theory Z advocates showed less leadership ability.
i
i
o u r knowledge, this is the first T o [time anyone has ever analyzed . i , the handwriting of so many CEOs. While many will argue that graphology is not an exact science, this exercise has proven it a credible predictor of self-reported management style. The handwriting profiles of the three groups of specimens bear remarkable resemblance to the way Theories X, Y, and Z are described in the management literature. []
43
Individual Profiles Rider went on to develop individual profiles of the 28 CEOs. Her comments varied with the extent of the specimen she had available. These individual profiles were fascinating because they illustrated many similarities among those who have risen to the top of the corporate hierarchy. Nearly all of the 28 CEOs can simplify tasks that confront them. Most of them are also well organized, good with numbers, and very creative. This list of traits would seem to support many of the conclusions of classical studies of management behavior.
1. Larry Liebman, "As a Business Tool, Graphoanalysis Still Fights Occult Stigma," Puget Sound Business Journal, February 18, 1988, p. 17; Michael J. McCarthy, "Handwriting Analysis as Personnel Tool," The Wail Street Journal, August 25, 1988, p. 19; and Marion Chesney, "Graphoanalysis--Choosing the 'Write' Person--Over 1500 Firms are Now Using It in Personnel Selection," Management World, March 1978, pp. 3-7. 2. "Reading Between the Lines--What Your Handwriting Reveals," Credit & Financial Management, January 1979, pp. 14-15, 38. 3. Anat Rofaeli and Richard J. Klimoski, "'Predicting Sales Success Through Handwriting Analysis: An Evaluation of the Effects of Training and Handwriting Sample Content," Journal of Applied Psychology, May 1983, pp. 212217.