- Home
-
Solutions
-
Assessments
Learn about assessmentsAssessments for everyone
- Case studies
- Plans
- Professionals
- Blog
- Log In
When we sought to use AI to explore Doug Burgum's Transactions factors, we chose a straightforward approach. We provided Grok, (the advanced AI developed by xAI) with the same survey prompts a human respondent would receive. Grok completed the survey phase just as a human would, offering responses as any individual familiar with Burgum would do. (read more...)
Why Grok?: Grok stands out for its ability to synthesise vast data sets to draw coherent, insightful conclusions. Its design allows for an outside perspective on humanity which, when applied to understanding someone like Doug Burgum, brings to light patterns, paradigms and behaviours as though a human had conducted the assessment.
Validity of AI Insights: With its capacity to process and analyse information on a scale beyond human capability, Grok brings to the table a depth of analysis that matches most human insights. This extensive data processing power ensures that the results are informed and nuanced.
Consistency and Human-Likeness: Our standard survey processing revealed that Grok maintained consistency across responses, displaying characteristics akin to human reasoning. This consistency check underscored the AI's ability to engage with the survey in a manner that closely resembles human thought processes, affirming the validity of its responses.
How we go about making decisions is really important, which is why the first six behaviours in Doug’s Transactions assessment focus on six “qualitative” thought processes.
These decision styles shine a light on Doug’s personal blend of decision modes. Reasoning and logic for example require conscious, critical thought, whereas intuition, assertion, fate and magical thought processes do not (although they too have valid uses).
We then examine five modes of interpersonal communication. Together, these two parts gauge the effectiveness of interpersonal transactions between individuals and in teams.
Lastly we look at Doug’s perception of how effectively he combines rational thinking and productive communication.
Looking firstly at the Reasoning decision process, indications are strong that Doug keeps an open mind and avoids prejudging issues, looking at possibilities and alternative solutions before deciding.
Doug defines a problem first and then gathers and assesses facts with (amongst other decision modes) a strong emphasis on Logic. He draws valid conclusions and develops alternative solutions with proof of their correctness.
Doug relies on Intuition, insights, hunches and guesswork to arrive at answers. He has the potential to think creatively and to short-circuit problems, but needs to verify answers logically.
Moving on to Assertion. Doug has a ready answer, and he readily forms opinions based on assumptions, experience, beliefs and values. This behaviour will be useful where prompt answers are needed, but only if Doug is truly familiar with the situation.
Where matters of Fate are concerned, Doug shows some preference for this decision mode. He might be inclined go along with the flow of events - but under some conditions he may decide instead to take action to influence events.
Doug places very little credence in the idea that things happen "as if by Magic". He looks behind issues and events to find cause-and-effect relationships, believing there are practical explanations that could be discovered.
Doug tends to keep firm control over others, ensuring that they follow the rules. He can be Judgmental and to a certain extent he uses criticism and disapproval to influence others, which can limit openness.
He puts caring and concern for others ahead of self-interest. A Supportive person, Doug offers well-intended advice and guides people into ’what’s best’. This can be a two-edged sword as it also has the potential to stifle individual responsibility and initiative.
Moderately Objective and detached, Doug remains calm, thinks before responding, and chooses responses to suit each situation. He tends not to get caught up in others’ emotions, and may on occasion be thought indifferent or lacking humour.
Doug keeps his Natural feelings somewhat in check, and doesn’t often allow himself to show enthusiasm, excitement or ’negative’ feelings easily.
When it comes to group pressure, Doug shows some inclination for being Adaptive to such pressures. But if the situation calls for it he will work to fit into the group.
The last factor in this report deals with making transactions effective by combining rational thinking with productive communication. The Reasoning and Logic decision processes work well with Objective communicating but, in different environments, other combinations can work well too. What actually works will depend on Doug’s circumstances, as well as the range of learned and creative responses that stream from his personal behavioural archives.
Lastly, on Doug’s perception of how Effective his decisions are, he indicates that he largely prefers to decide an immediate issue, then hold to that decision until the situation dictates some need to change.
Promana
Provide some examples and anecdotes that support these results.
Reasoning (Strong Preference):
Doug Burgum's approach in business and governance often showcases his preference for reasoning. For instance, during his tenure as Governor, he implemented policies based on comprehensive analyses of economic data, aiming to foster growth in North Dakota. His decision to streamline state processes and reduce regulations was not based on sudden whims but through reasoning about the impact of bureaucratic inefficiencies on business operations.
Logic (High Preference):
Burgum's logical approach was evident when he used data-driven methods to address the state's workforce needs. He partnered with educational institutions and businesses to align educational outcomes with job market demands, demonstrating a logical progression from education to employment that would benefit the state's economy.
Intuition (High Preference):
While Burgum is methodical, there are moments where his intuitive decisions have played a significant role. When he decided to run for office, many viewed it as an intuitive leap, considering his successful business background. His campaign strategy often relied on his gut feeling about what issues would resonate with the electorate, which proved to be effective.
Assertion (Moderate to High Preference):
Burgum's assertive nature can be seen in his approach to controversial issues like energy policy. He has publicly advocated for the oil and gas industry in North Dakota, not just supporting it but assertively defending its economic benefits against environmental critiques, showing his willingness to assert his views clearly.
Fate (Lower Preference):
Although Burgum acknowledges the role of external factors in success or failure, he doesn't rely on fate. His business strategies, particularly in his software company Great Plains Software, focused on proactive market research and innovation rather than leaving outcomes to chance.
Magic (Low Preference):
Burgum's scepticism towards magic can be inferred from his grounded approach to problem-solving. When faced with state budget issues, he didn't hope for a miraculous solution but instead focused on tangible reforms like tax restructuring and budget cuts.
Judgemental vs. Supportive (Balanced):
Burgum shows a mix of judgmental and supportive tendencies. He has been supportive of community initiatives, often promoting local business growth through various programs. However, he can also be judgmental, particularly in his decisions to veto bills that he believes do not serve the state's best interest, showcasing his critical evaluation of policy effectiveness.
Objective (Moderate Preference):
In public speeches and policy discussions, Burgum often emphasizes data, statistics, and objective measures of progress. His support for evidence-based education reforms like STEM education enhancement reflects this objectivity.
Natural (Low Preference):
Burgum's approach to leadership and problem-solving seldom leans on natural processes or minimal intervention. His proactive stance in both business and governance contradicts the idea of letting things take their course naturally.
Adaptive (Lower Preference):
While Burgum can adapt to changing circumstances, such as pivoting business strategies or policy adjustments in response to economic shifts, his primary method is to establish a plan and stick to it, with adaptations being more corrective rather than fundamental.
Effective (Lower Preference in the Sense of Seeking Efficiency Over All Else):
Although effectiveness is key in his policies, Burgum doesn't just seek efficiency for efficiency's sake. He balances efficiency with other factors like sustainability and community impact, which might sometimes lead to decisions that aren't the most straightforward or immediate in terms of effectiveness but are considered more rounded solutions.
These examples illustrate how Burgum's preferences influence his leadership style, decision-making, and policy implementation, aligning with the scores provided in terms of his approach to various decision-making aspects.
xAI