I completed my first ever Psychometric test. It was called a Rapid Personality Report and was allegedly based on the work of famous Psychologist Meredith Belbin [main site here]. I was very interested by the results, partly to see what it would say about me, but also… well I'll explain that we go on.
The test took about 10 minutes and involved rating 40 adjectives that may or may describe me: I was asked to rate them on a scale of 1 to 5.
- "Not at all like me",
- "Just a little like me",
- "Rather like me",
- "Much like me",
- "Very like me"
to give you and idea of some of the adjectives: Ruthless, Outspoken, Formal, Orderly, Warm, Unusual, Fluent etc
The resulting report I received was a might interesting. My first reaction was:
"That's about 50% accurate, I'd agree with about half of it, the other half is just not me at all". Yet, as is often the way, we're not the always the best person to judge. I read the report to a couple of other people who seemed to feel it was "mostly" me and mostly accurate.
Looking a little closer, the report is littered with vague generalisations that I'm fairly sure are general enough to apply to just about anyone. Furthermore there's a lot of sentences that, at first, glance, seem to make sense and mean something, until you actually spend a moment and think about what it really means. Let me explain with some examples:
Under the heading Structural
"You do not see yourself as being naturally suited to dealing with details and may, in fact, believe that too much self-imposed order and structure reduce your effectiveness."
Look at that phrase "too much". By its very nature, too much means that it's not good, think about it: "if you eat too much food, or drink too much alcohol, it's bad for you": spending too much money,
Too much means more than a safe or acceptable level. So of course, "too much self imposed order" would be a bad thing.
"Inevitably, however, experience and the nature of your role are likely to influence the extent to which you actually put this approach into practice."
What exactly does this mean? Surely this so obvious as so not bother writing, anything we do or try and do is limited in such a way.
Under Confidence
"Your answers indicate that you are generally confident in your ability to be effective at work and can cope with a reasonable amount of pressure and stress"
Here again, wording that is meaningless. "you are generally confident in you ability to effective at work". I am confident that I'd be "just good enough"? Well duh, pretty much anyone is confident that they could just about get by at work. "Cope with a reasonable amount of pressure and stress". Again that covers just about everyone. We can all cope (and sometimes do our best work) on a reasonable amount of pressure and stress. If the pressure or stress became unreasonable – pretty much everyone would suffer as a result. That is the nature of stress and takes me back to the "too much" arguement above.
"Your answers suggest that you are unlikely to actively seek confrontation although are normally inclined to stand your ground when faced with some opposition."
I'm sure we can all point towards someone who is argumentative and a bully, but really, how many of us would actively seen out seek out confrontation?
"You are moderately persuasive and are unlikely to seek high-profile roles unless you feel fairly secure with your surrounding and the people you will be working. "
This one makes me smile, having worked with many many people there are few (if any) who would ever seek a high-profile role if they didn't feel secure in their ability to do it – Think about it, who, would actively go after jobs they didn't feel confident they could do, or wasn't sure they could fit in with the company/organisation?
"You are most content when there is a balance between working others and working alone: this is because you value both periods of time with little social contact and also having people available when you wish to share your ideas and opinions."
This also makes me smile a good deal, read it again. It's so wonderfully vague and general that I'm sure if would fit with just about everyone. Essentially it's saying you like times with other people and times alone. That is essentially all of us, whether we are extraverts or introverts. Very few people are solely one or the other, most of us lean in a particular direction, wanting to spend more time along or more time with other people, but almost all of us want some times alone and some times with others or in a group.
"You may also feel somewhat uncomfortable if pressure is constant and a hectic and rushed atmosphere is the norm."
Again, just notice how obvious this is. What this is saying is that "too much pressure if a bad thing" duh. Most people like times of pressure, it's been shown again and again that most of us work better under a little pressure and with a little stress. But constant pressure isn't good for anyone – even if you enjoy high pressure situations, constant pressure isn't good for your health or wellbeing.
"Your answers indicate that you tend to strike a balance between conventionality and individualism."
Whilst I feel this is true in myself, I do wonder how many other people this vague statement would apply to. Isn't there times we want to conform and times we don't?
"Your respect for traditional methods means that you would probably not be comfortable in a completely unconventional work place."
I've included this one because it couldn't be more wrong. I'd love to work in unconventional workplaces.
"Generally, you are probably comfortable in most jobs settings except those involving extremes"
Stating the damned obvious for most of us, by their very nature, only a very small minority of people would enjoy working in extreme environments. But I do wonder what this report would describe as "extreme", extreme in what sense. Working in the Antarctic ice station might be seen as extreme, but to me, it would be working for Bank of America or a call centre, or even worse, a call centre in Bank of America!!!!
I've copied the whole of the report, so feel free to have a look, how much it would you attribute to you, or someone else you know?
Link to PDF of the full report