“Walking around” on this site you will very soon notice and become aware of what kind of firm Gordon Consulting is.
We are behavior scientists and psychologists, specialized in personality assessment of people applying for advanced positions or training possibilities.

Welcome to get in touch – preferably by e-mail (we are not always at the phone)!
And very welcome to “walk around” on this site!

Present missions

During recent times Gordon Consulting has been involved in following missions:
a) It started with a very interesting and not that uncommon question: how to intervene in an old, well planted and traditional organisation in order to change attitudes and basic behavior patterns? Could this be made within a time limit that will not be too long?
Well, well, well, in most cases people oppose more drastic changes, particularly if they are required to change quickly. So, this has to be studied a bit more – and experienced consultants have to be called in to assist.
b) Is it acceptable to punish airline pilots or sea officers if they make operative mistakes that, in the worst case, could lead to expensive and added costs for their companies?
Punish? In what way? And why punish? Would such interventions lead to something better? Are you sure? Ever heard of added training possibilities?
I stepped in and checked the guy. He was alright, but sorry. Excused himself and would never do this mistake again. I believed him. Report was written.
c) Discussions concerning personality assessments of two candidates applying to a management position.
What kind of personality profile do you want? How about the level of intellectual capacities? Abilities as leader?
I made notes and confirmed: yes, I can.
d) The Chief Air Medical Examiner at The Swedish Transport Agency called. Would it possible for me to appear at a conference for Air Medical Examiners this coming autumn and there give a speech about Aviation Psychology – in historic times and up to now.
I said: yes, it is possible. And I can.

Personality assessment program – this is what it could look like

This is just an example:  a customer of ours (we can call him C) turns to us asking for our service. C wants to employ a new CEO for one of C:s companies or organizations. C says that a recruitment agency has selected three very good potentials for the position. C has now met and interviewed all three, but he feels uncertain. Who is the best one? Is any of them really good enough? Will they possibly live up to the expectations? C wants us to meet the candidates for a second opinion.

First step: Meeting C, finding out as much as possible about the company and the expectations of the new CEO.
Next: Creating a requirement profile based upon what we have found out.
Next: Selecting our investigation tools from our “tool library” – psychological special inquiries, a few test instruments, such things.
Next: Making a schedule when to meet who.
Next: The investigation starts – meeting candidate no. 1. Starting time around 09:15 a m.
Fifteen minutes socialization: Introduction talk, making our best to make the candidate feel relaxed but yet up on his/her toes.
Working time: A series of tasks is introduced, one by one, and the candidate is asked to make his best to manage them. Time varies depending of what tasks are to become fulfilled, but normally this part of the investigation takes around three hours, a brief coffee break included.
Lunch break: While we are analyzing the data from the tasks the candidate will have a one hour lunch break on his/her own.
Interview: Our way of interviewing varies from time to time. The aim is to really get a good enough knowledge of the candidate. Who is he/she behind the formal outlook and the credentials? What about the personal, social background? We try to figure out the major parts of the social network around him/her – all the way from the childhood, up through the young years and further on up to now?
Preferences, avoidances, the easy ways and the complications. How has he/she previously used his/her mental resources? Have there been any stops on the way forward? Successes and failures? Leisure activities? And more… Time for the interview is normally around two hours, but could vary.
Ending time of the investigation: Around 3:30 p m.
Next: Analysis of all parts of information. The main analysis is made by and while writing a report, or a “tale” of the candidate. We are writing a brief life story of the candidate, pointing out special parts of interest: the development of the mental resources and the major parts of the personality such as the degree of maturity, the self-confidence, the strong parts and the weaker parts. The story of the candidate ends with a brief summary and a final recommendation or advice.
Time to write the report varies quite a lot, but mostly it takes in between two-three hours.
Next: The report is confidentially provided orally and/or in writing to C. And we are of course open for questions and for discussions of our findings.


EASA:s recommendations now officially published

EASA is the European Union Authority for Aviation Safety. The main activities of the organisation include the strategy and safety management, the certification of aviation products and the oversight of approved organisations and EU Member States. The Agency staff is composed of more than 700 aviation experts and administrators from all EU Member States. The headquarters are in Cologne (Germany) with an office in Brussels and 3 international permanent representations in Washington (USA), Montreal (Canada) and Beijing (China).

Almost a year has now passed since the Germanwings tragedy occurred in the French Alps. Shortly after the accident the European Commissioner for Transport requested a Task Force lead by EASA to make recommendations which would prevent such a disaster from happening again. The Task Force delivered several recommendations in July 2015 and recently they were established and officially declared.

Among the recommendations you can find the following lines:
All airline pilots should undergo psychological evaluation as part of training or before entering service.
National authorities should strengthen the psychological and communication aspects of aero-medical examiners training and practice.

There are indeed several other recommendations given, but as an aviation psychologist I will particularly stress what now has been stated above. The Swedish Authority is in this case The Swedish Transport Agency and I have recently discussed the situation with the accountable Air Medical Examiner at the Agency, providing the department with some advice of mine.