| Ever wondered why you always end up in the wrong | | | | slightly different answers, plus allows for plenty of |
| job or the worst relationships, even when they | | | | "cross-check" questions which ask essentially the |
| seemed so promising going in? It can be especially | | | | same things, but from different perspectives and |
| confusing when there doesn't really seem to be | | | | with different wording. Often an assessment will be |
| anything wrong with the work or the other person, | | | | tested for internal consistency by giving the same |
| just that things never did seem to take off or click. | | | | individuals half of the test questions (say, all the odd |
| Well, maybe it's not the work or your prospective | | | | numbered questions). The test result is tabulate, and |
| partners - maybe you just don't have a clear | | | | then the other half of the questions is given and the |
| understanding of who you really are in the first place | | | | results compared. If both halves produce essentially |
| - your personality type, your risk aversion levels, | | | | identical results, the test can be considered internally |
| your tendencies and the underlying assets, | | | | consistent. There are innumerable "fun" tests out |
| preferences and issues in your make-up that you | | | | there, from "Are you a good kisser?" to assessments |
| may not be taking into consideration. But how do you | | | | designed to look scientific but which, in effect, tell |
| go about "finding yourself" without embarking on a | | | | you what you want to hear (along the lines of fake |
| navel-gazing and soul-searching journey of epic | | | | horoscopes and palm readings at the fair) and only |
| proportions (which, face it, few of us have the time | | | | after you sign into their "members-only results" area, |
| for)? One of the best places to start is personality | | | | as a means to procuring your email address. Or they |
| assessment. There are literally thousands of different | | | | give you a free low-content, vague and essentially |
| assessments available, often on the Internet where | | | | useless answer, and then offer to send you the full |
| they are either free (although often in an abbreviated | | | | results if you sign up for their product or course. Of |
| form from their full fee access) or at a reasonable | | | | course, there are several respected and reliable |
| charge. A quality test can help you map your | | | | assessment companies that also offer a two-tiered |
| personality makeup as a whole and perhaps tease | | | | membership approach (free scaled back test, and |
| out previously hidden factors in your mindset or | | | | membership-fee full service and content version), so |
| behavior that may affect your decision making, your | | | | you need to be able to differentiate between the |
| overall job and life satisfaction in given situations and | | | | two. Many well-respected assessments, especially the |
| your choices. There are many website and | | | | popular ones such as the MAPP (Motivational |
| hard-published assessments which can help you | | | | Appraisal of Personal Potential), the Myers-Brigg Type |
| identify your strengths and weaknesses, and where | | | | Indicator or the DISC (Dominance, Influence, |
| your personal gifts lay. However, you have to pay | | | | Steadiness and Conscientiousness) Profile, charge |
| attention and steer clear of "recreational" | | | | quite a bit for the full service. But this is only fair, as |
| assessments and quizzes if you are looking for an | | | | they are the result of literally years of research, |
| accurate and predictive overview, especially on the | | | | proprietary information gathering, intellectual property |
| Internet. To be truly useful, a personality assessment | | | | creation and relentless testing, not to mention |
| must meet three criteria: It must be empirical and | | | | countless man-hours of work. Also, many of these |
| accurate | | | | high-quality and scientifically validated tests are so |
| This means that the test is based on scientifically | | | | complicated, and the results so open to |
| designed questions that are proven to be predictive | | | | misinterpretation by the layperson, that in order to |
| (by having known personality types take the test, | | | | get the full benefit and usefulness of the test it |
| and checking for correlation in the results). It must be | | | | needs to be administered by, and the results |
| normed | | | | personally reviewed and discussed with, a trained |
| This means that when the assessment results are | | | | administrator. The results you get from these |
| tabulated as a group, the number and pattern of | | | | fee-paid assessments are generally worth the |
| personality types it presents must be representative | | | | money, if you have it. If you don't, you can still find |
| of the general population who are likely to be taking | | | | several small or scaled back assessments that give |
| the test. This is done by testing a representative | | | | reasonably detailed and accurate results for free, or |
| sample, graphing the test results and then matching | | | | for a nominal registration fee. Another way to get a |
| the results against a scientifically predicted bell curve | | | | proper assessment on the cheap is to take one |
| for that particular population. Note that if an | | | | offered in a book, either purchased or loaned out |
| assessment is designed for a specific, narrow | | | | from your local public library. Many assessments can |
| population (such as law enforcement cadets, | | | | be found in hardcopy form and even if they lack the |
| engineers or abused women), it will produce results | | | | depth of a professionally administered version, they |
| that are skewed from the general population norm, | | | | can be taken and the results studied and interpreted |
| but which can be internally predictable and normed | | | | at your leisure. Of course, as with the Internet |
| within that narrowly defined group. It must be reliable | | | | versions, you have to critically judge the content and |
| and consistent | | | | accuracy of any book-bound personality assessment |
| This means that the test must return the overall | | | | you take. What you find out about yourself once |
| same pattern of results for the same person taking it | | | | you've competed a few assessments may shock |
| repeatedly, even if their answers differ slightly from | | | | you. Or it may simply confirm suspicions you've had |
| day to day due to normal moods and perceptions. | | | | all along. Either way, by actively and consciously using |
| This also means that the greater the number of | | | | the information you have gained, you will stand a far |
| questions, the more likely it is to be accurate | | | | better chance of creating and maintaining a quality |
| (assuming it was created by trained individuals). A | | | | and style of living that works for you rather than |
| large pool of questions (from which the actual test is | | | | against you - and that's an assessment we can all live |
| randomly generated) allows a little "wriggle room" for | | | | with. |