For most of my professional life, I have been driven by one question: how can we make better decisions about people?
Over the past 25 years, I have worked at the intersection of research and practice. I have served as a Senior Lecturer at Stockholm University, contributed to the development and validation of psychometric assessments for both organisational and clinical use, including MAP, Matrigma, and P150; contributed to international standards such as ISO 10667 and the EFPA Test Review Model; served on the EFPA Board of Assessment; collaborated with organisations including Hogan Assessments, IPAT, and Oxford Psychological Press; presented at international conferences such as SIOP and EAWOP; and published peer-reviewed research with colleagues from psychology, economics, medicine, and mathematics.
Working on both sides of the research–practice divide has reinforced one conviction: despite decades of scientific progress, there is still a substantial gap between what research tells us and how people decisions are actually made. Every day, organisations, healthcare professionals, and public authorities make decisions with lasting consequences for individuals, teams, and organisational performance. Too often, those decisions rely more on intuition, tradition, or persuasive marketing than on the best available scientific evidence.
At MU, this ambition is brought together in MU Leader Selection Science® — our research-based approach to making leadership assessment and selection more evidence-based, ethical and quality assured.
Closing that research-to-practice gap has been, and remains, the strongest motivation throughout my career. Joining Mercuri Urval Research Institute (MU RI) has allowed me to devote even more of my work to what has always been closest to my professional heart: translating scientific evidence into better people decisions.
It is a decision I have never regretted.
At MU RI, I have the opportunity to work in an environment where science and practice genuinely come together, alongside highly skilled researchers and practitioners. In my view, that is what makes MU RI unique.
Having worked extensively in both academia and applied psychology, I have rarely—if ever—seen a research institute so closely integrated with the practical work of leadership assessment.
At MU RI, we apply MU Leader Selection Science® to ensure that leader assessment and selection is evidence-based, ethical and quality assured. In practice, this means to develop tools and quality-assuring methods that help organisations make better decisions about leaders and leadership.
Projects at MU RI may involve the development of psychological tests, the design of methods to establish adequate requirements for unique positions, quality assurance of tools and methods to collect assessment data, and studies on inclusion and diversity. These projects also include an ongoing dialogue with practitioners – the MU Expert consultants certified in the method used - around the world who work hard to fulfil high standards in client work.
At the heart of this approach is a simple idea: leadership assessment should be grounded in knowledge, facts and robust evidence, while keeping ethics and quality assurance front and centre.
And that really matters. Skilled use of effective methods leads to reliable advice and good decisions. Good decisions lead to sustainable leadership success. And that benefits both individuals and organisations.
What I also value is that this work is never static. We continuously bring new knowledge through validating, improving and challenging our own tools and methods. Together with partners such as DNV, ISO, Mercer and other expert bodies, MU RI works on research and development as validation studies, tool refinement, frameworks and certification programmes for MU Experts.
In their client work the MU Experts combine science and practice to help clients make better decisions about leaders. They work with proven processes and solid scientific knowledge, while keeping the needs of organisations in focus. Together with the client, they make sure the selection process is fair, relevant and designed to increase the chances of choosing the right person for the role. That means reducing bias, avoiding discrimination and treating everyone involved — including the candidate — with fairness and respect.
For me personally, this is where everything comes together: psychology, science, psychometrics, working life, and the ambition to make a real difference in practice.
I feel lucky to be part of a research institute that takes both people and evidence seriously.
One thing I’ve learnt over the years is that work needs to be both meaningful and enjoyable. I’m lucky that in this role, it is both — and that I enjoy it every day.