Formal assessments provide several advantages. Second, they are designed to systematically explore key leadership qualities. Third, feedback from the assessment allows districts to measure candidates against a much larger pool, comparing them to a field of thousands rather than the handful typically invited for interviews. To be useful, any test requires a clear conception of what is being measured. Over the years, leadership has been correlated to social dominance, vision, intelligence, interpersonal competence, energy, technical skills, charisma, and many other qualities.
Every test thus reflects a particular set of assumptions about leadership.
Obviously, the same candidate might perform very differently on these two instruments. If those scoring high on the test are shown to perform well on the job, the test has value in predicting success. In some cases, a similar instrument is given to superiors or subordinates, asking them to rate the leader on the same criteria. Scoring of tests is done in several ways. The meaning of the scores is determined by comparing them to others who have taken the test or to a group of proved leaders.