By Pernille Flensted-Jensen, Senior Consultant at Humanostics
We are often asked if the PI Behavioral Assessment is valid. This question may be understood in two different ways. Scientifically, validity refers to whether the tool measures what we say it measures. But usually the question refers to whether PI BA is ‘correct’, i.e. if people recognise themselves in the result.
Let’s have a look at the validity first: Many studies show that the behavioral assessment lives up to the standards and that it is not only valid – it measures what we say it measures – but also reliable, meaning that it measures stable factors. In fact, the PI BA was certified by DNV GL in 2018, and this means that the assessment meets the rigorous standards set by psychological experts in the European Psychological Association EFPA. In other words, PI BA is scientifically validated for occupational use in practically all types of jobs across all industries.
Moreover, PI’s own science team has conducted more than 350 validity studies documenting a relationship between factors / profiles and performance, based on an analysis of important parameters such as sales, customer satisfaction, and tenure.
But are assessment takers able to recognise themselves in the results? Judging from the responses we get, the answer is mainly yes. Perhaps the most comment we get is ”This is just spot on!”.
PI has also investigated this: Between May 2018 and August 2019 feedback was collected from assessment takers who received their behavioral report, the one which based on the assessment taker’s self pattern describes the most typical behavior.
In the email containing the report there was a link to a survey where the assessment takers could indicate to what extent they found the report precise.
Of the 3535 respondents who answered on their own behalf, 86 % gave a 4 or 5 out of 5 which indicates that the lions’ share of respondents found that the report was an accurate description of them.
The responses have also been matched with the reference profiles of the assessment takers. The most common reference profiles were Collaborator and Operator – both accounted for 9 % of the responses – whereas only 3 % were Analyzers. The reference profiles which were scored as the most precise were Captain and Persuader (with a score of 4.6 and 4.53, respectively) and the least precise was Individualist (3,86). Please note that were still many Individualists who found that the report correctly reflected them.
In sum: Based on scientific studies and on the feedback we get from assessment takers, we can conclude that the PI Behavioral Assessment is both very valid and very precise. The next step is to analyse if some of the words and phrases in the reports, for example the one describing Individualists, need to be adjusted, so we make sure that it is not a few words and phrases which elicit a negative response.
If yiu wish to know more, please contact us or click HERE.