Updated April 2026 · 12 min read · Personality + business reasoning specialist
| Provider | Hogan Assessment Systems |
|---|---|
| Headquarters | Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA |
| Key tests | HPI (personality), HDS (derailers), MVPI (motives), HBRI (business reasoning) |
| Used by | JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, BCG, McKinsey (selected pipelines), GE, Citi, Standard Chartered |
| Defining feature | Most respected personality assessment for senior leadership selection globally |
Hogan is the gold standard for personality assessment in senior corporate selection. Where most personality tests focus on the Big Five traits, Hogan's three core inventories cover three distinct angles: how you behave on a normal day (HPI), how you behave under stress (HDS), and what motivates you (MVPI). For senior management, leadership pipeline, and high-stakes selection, employers increasingly require a Hogan battery.
The cognitive companion HBRI (Hogan Business Reasoning Inventory) is the cognitive ability test typically paired with the personality battery for leadership selection.
Measures normal-range personality behaviour — how you typically act when things are going well. Seven primary scales, each broken into 3-7 subscales: Adjustment (emotional stability), Ambition (goal-directedness), Sociability (extraversion), Interpersonal Sensitivity (people skills), Prudence (conscientiousness), Inquisitive (curiosity), Learning Approach (academic orientation). 206 items, ~15-20 minutes. Used to predict day-to-day workplace behaviour.
Measures behaviours that emerge under stress, fatigue, or pressure — what Hogan calls "derailers." Eleven scales mapped to interpersonal patterns: Excitable (volatile under pressure), Skeptical (cynical), Cautious (overly risk-averse), Reserved (withdrawn), Leisurely (passive-aggressive), Bold (overconfident), Mischievous (manipulative), Colourful (attention-seeking), Imaginative (creatively erratic), Diligent (perfectionist), Dutiful (overly compliant). 168 items, ~15-20 minutes. The "dark side" framing makes HDS uniquely useful for predicting leadership failure risk.
Measures core motives and values — what energises you, what you want from work and life. Ten scales: Recognition, Power, Hedonism, Altruistic, Affiliation, Tradition, Security, Commerce, Aesthetics, Science. 200 items, ~15-20 minutes. Used to predict role fit, cultural alignment, and long-term retention.
Hogan's cognitive ability test. 24 questions in 30 minutes (~75 seconds per question). Mixed format: business case scenarios with embedded numerical, logical, and verbal reasoning. The questions are framed as "manager faces decision" — you analyse the data and pick the best decision.
HBRI scoring is more nuanced than typical cognitive tests because the right answer requires both calculation accuracy and judgement. Two answers might be technically possible from the data; the better one accounts for stated business context.
Unlike SHL or Cut-e, Hogan reports are not delivered to the candidate. The hiring manager or coach receives a multi-page report comparing your scores to global norms (high, average, low) and identifying patterns: leadership strengths, development areas, derailer risks, motivational fit.
For senior selection, a "Hogan debrief" — a structured conversation with the candidate about their results — is often part of the process. Candidates may receive a personal report ("Hogan Lead Report") if they're in a development pipeline.
Hogan is heavy in financial services and consulting at senior levels. JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Citi, Bank of America, Standard Chartered, Morgan Stanley. BCG, McKinsey, and Bain use Hogan in selected senior hire pipelines. GE, Caterpillar, Honeywell use Hogan for leadership pipelines. Microsoft and Cisco use Hogan for executive selection.
Subtly, yes. Hogan is more sophisticated than typical personality tests at flagging socially-desirable answering — they include "validity scales" that catch you if you try to look universally good. But each scale has a role-fit profile. A senior trader role values high Ambition, high Adjustment (calm under pressure), and moderate Bold (confidence). A senior auditor role values high Prudence, high Diligent, and lower Mischievous.
The strategy is not to fake — Hogan catches that — but to authentically reflect on your professional self rather than your private self. Most candidates over-report flaws. Calibrate to the professional version of you.
HPI / HDS / MVPI: Don't prepare in the cognitive-test sense. Read about Big Five and the Hogan derailer model so you understand the framework. Answer authentically as your professional self. Avoid extreme answers (always / never) unless you genuinely live them — extreme patterns trigger the validity scales.
HBRI: Practice business case-style cognitive items. Time pressure is moderate (75s per question), so the real challenge is integrating numerical reasoning with stated business context. Practise reading a scenario and picking the answer that's "technically right AND business-appropriate."
To make the "technically right AND business-appropriate" distinction concrete, consider a scenario like this — original and illustrative, not a real Hogan item:
Q. A regional manager can hit this quarter's revenue target by either (a) discounting a slow-moving product line by 20%, projected to clear inventory and add $180K in revenue, or (b) delaying the launch of a new product line by one quarter to focus sales resources on the existing catalogue, projected to add $210K. The company's stated priority this year is new-product market share, not short-term revenue. Which option best serves the manager's actual objective?
A. Option (a), despite the lower revenue figure. Option (b) hits a higher number but directly works against the stated strategic priority (new-product market share) by delaying the new launch — the numerically larger figure is a distractor. This is exactly the pattern HBRI tests: correctly reading which number is bigger isn't the skill being measured, integrating that number with the stated business context is.
Candidates who treat HBRI like a pure numerical reasoning test — simply picking whichever option produces the larger number — consistently underperform relative to their raw cognitive ability, because a meaningful share of HBRI items are built around exactly this kind of trap: a numerically appealing option that violates context given elsewhere in the scenario.
Candidates who've encountered SHL's OPQ32 or Thomas International's PPA sometimes assume Hogan measures the same underlying traits with different labels, but the three-inventory HPI/HDS/MVPI structure is a genuinely different model, not a relabeling. Where OPQ32 and PPA each produce one profile describing your general working style, Hogan deliberately splits the picture into three separate lenses — normal-day behaviour, stress-triggered derailers, and underlying motives — precisely because Hogan's research found that a single profile misses the leadership-failure patterns that only emerge under pressure. This is also why Hogan is favoured specifically for senior and leadership-track selection rather than general entry-level screening: the HDS "dark side" component is built around identifying derailment risk in people who will hold significant authority, which is a narrower and more senior-specific concern than general role fit.
Since Hogan reports typically go to the hiring manager or an executive coach rather than directly to candidates, being invited into a structured debrief conversation about your own results is itself a meaningful signal — it usually means you're being seriously considered for a role, often specifically a leadership-track one, rather than being filtered out early. In a debrief, the most useful approach is treating derailer scores (from HDS) as genuine developmental information rather than a verdict — everyone has some elevated derailer scores, since the scale is specifically measuring tendencies that emerge under pressure, not flaws present at all times. Coming to a debrief with genuine curiosity about how a specific derailer might show up in your actual working style, rather than a defensive posture, tends to land better with the people evaluating you, since it demonstrates exactly the kind of self-awareness the assessment is trying to measure in the first place. If a specific derailer score genuinely surprises you, it's worth asking the debrief facilitator for a concrete example of the behaviour pattern it's meant to capture — abstract scale names like "Excitable" or "Skeptical" are far easier to reflect on honestly once you can connect them to a specific, recognisable workplace scenario rather than a label alone, and most experienced debrief facilitators are happy to walk through several such examples if you ask directly, since that concrete grounding is usually what turns an abstract score into something you can actually act on afterward, rather than a number you simply file away and forget without ever really understanding what it means for how you actually show up at work.
Use TestSolve to crack the Hogan assessment
AI-powered answers and reasoning sent to your phone in seconds. Free first solve, no signup.
Try it free →See pricing