This article review examines research on the distinctive personality profiles of HR executives compared to their counterparts in other business fields. Drawing on assessments like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, and Global Personality Inventory, the paper identifies key traits: HR leaders score higher in empathy, intuition, sensitivity, and collaboration while ranking lower in competitiveness and entrepreneurship. The review explores competing interpretations of these findings—whether they reflect genuine professional values, self-selection bias, cultural factors within HR, or perceived lower prestige—and considers implications for HR's strategic role in business.
According to the article "The HR personality," HR executives demonstrate distinct interpersonal traits when compared to executives in other fields of specialty. Research shows that HR executives score much higher in traits such as empathy and consideration for others. They tend to be more intuitive and possess a deeper understanding of how others perceive the world (Flander, 2008). This makes intuitive sense given that HR professionals work in the business of people—whether in recruitment, conflict resolution, or other modern HR functions.
Most indicators suggest that individuals working in HR tend to be less competitive and more focused on building harmony within the work environment. The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument found that while most effective vice presidents prefer to settle conflict with a "win-win" outcome, HR executives are less likely to press issues to the extent that others' ideas are overridden (Flander, 2008). However, this tendency can have disadvantages: HR executives may struggle to advocate for their own viewpoints given their dislike of conflict.
Major personality assessments, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, reveal critical personality differences among HR personnel. While most top executives overall are extroverts, HR specialists are more likely to have a feeling orientation rather than a thinking orientation compared with fellow vice presidents (Flander, 2008). HR executives tend to make decisions based on qualitative factors such as values, rather than logic or data-driven analysis. While all executive vice presidents rank high on responsibility, self-control, insightfulness, and independence, HR vice presidents score notably higher on sensitivity (Flander, 2008).
This difference is unsurprising: while HR executives must use data-driven analysis, they must also be sensitive to the human needs underlying the data. Many interpersonal aspects of HR cannot be fully captured by facts and figures alone. The Global Personality Inventory test found that HR executives ranked higher on self-awareness, optimism, sociability, empathy, and consideration for others, while ranking lower on manipulation, passive-aggressiveness, and intimidation (Flander, 2008). A notable finding: HR vice presidents also ranked lower on entrepreneurship and inclination to pursue commercial activities (Flander, 2008).
Evaluating these conclusions fully proves difficult. On one hand, the data could indicate that HR personnel are genuinely more empathetic and less business-oriented than other executives and rank higher in traditionally feminine qualities because they are drawn to this profession. Alternatively, HR may have less prestige and cachet than positions such as Chief Information Officer or Chief Financial Officer. Individuals who develop expertise in HR may be slightly less ambitious. The culture of HR might be more welcoming to individuals from certain demographic categories, such as women, which could influence personality score results.
Additionally, the HR culture itself might be less likely to reward competitive personalities. Self-selection and the nature of the profession itself could both affect results. Understanding causation—whether personality differences drive career choice or the profession shapes personality expression—remains challenging.
The results are controversial because they seem to suggest that HR executives are "weaker" than their counterparts in other departments, reflecting a masculine, "macho" view of success in business. However, others disagree, arguing that a zero-sum-game attitude may not be the most effective approach. As one HR executive stated, "I don't see anybody who's not tough-minded or business-minded. HR leaders don't have to be confrontational or divisive to be effective" (Flander, 2008). In fact, a confrontational approach could be counterproductive to HR's core function. The ability to create win-win scenarios is the very definition of effective HR leadership.
Some data on HR personalities contradicts findings suggesting that top-ranked HR vice presidents are just as individually driven and focused on metrics as their colleagues in other areas (Flander, 2008). One psychologist and executive coach noted: "It's not so much that they're people-oriented. There are lots of HR vice presidents who are business-minded, analytical and data-driven. It's that they may not be as enterprising or competitive—they're not creative that way" (Flander, 2008). This perception can result in HR being seen as weaker and less strategic, rather than simply possessing different business orientations. Significantly, CEOs seldom come from the ranks of HR, indicating a persistent divide between HR and other business areas (Flander, 2008).
"HR separation from core business functions creates organizational risk"
You’re 83% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.