If you would like to be notified when new content is posted to our website, Subscribe to our email alerts.Subscribe Now
The methodology used by the Motivational Profile (MP) allows the test taker to freely select meaningful content in terms of which they will be assessed. For this, many culturally neutral and universally applicable archetypes, metaphors, or roles such as “mother” and “warrior” are provided from which the candidate can choose the most appropriate ones to describe their life, work, and relationships. The meanings of many of the archetypes overlap but are also specific. From a socially desirable point of view, all archetypes hold both “positive” and “negative” implications.
Once the candidate has selected the content of the assessment, several exercises involving the ordering and weighting of the selected metaphors follow. These processes have been designed in line with B. Shalit and R.S. Lazarus’s methodology for the measurement of motivation.
What follows next is a targeted feedback process in which the test taker is required to rate the accuracy of the implications of their previous selections and rankings, as algorithmically interpreted by the expert-system embedded in the MP administration software.
The assessment process is non-transparent, and the outcome cannot be manipulated.
Given that the MP evaluates psychological constructs which can be affected by circumstances, both situational and more enduring aspects of motivation are assessed. Therefore, the test-retest reliability of more enduring tendencies is higher than that for tendencies which are more prone to situational contingencies.
The constructs measured include a person’s:
Many aspects of an individual are thus described in the MP report.
The MP has been developed primarily for the purposes of coaching, psychotherapy, and self-insight. It is often used as part of a holistic assessment battery which includes the CPP, VO and MP, for executive selection and placement. MP results are particularly useful for identifying people-risks within certain work and team contexts.
The practitioner should ideally have a thorough understanding of the various constructs measured, Jungian Psychology in particular. An in-depth understanding of the work of Shalit and Lazarus as well as of the Enneagram, are also critical. Myss’s work on the Chakras or Energy Themes as well as on the archetypes will further contextualize a candidate’s MP results.
It is important that the assessed constructs should not be addressed as independent from
one another. Instead, the complete profile of the candidate should be scanned to find a key
to unlock deep understanding of the candidate’s integrated functioning. For example:
The MP in combination with the VO and CPP results of the person themselves, or even that of team members, can add further richness to the talent management process. For example: A Persona or Front Stage on the MP which contradicts the VO result, may indicate that the candidate is being mentally drained by having to adapt to a cultural milieu to which they are not well suited. Should the person also show a high need to perform on the Head-Heart- Feet and the Energy Themes of the MP, in combination with a Type 1, 3 or 6 Enneagram profile, yet not meet the cognitive requirements of the work-related position as based on their CPP result, serious complications can be expected.
A team leader with a Type 8, 3 or 1 Enneagram, very high Head-Heart-Feet scores, maybe Red and Orange values on the VO and perhaps a CPP profile which is not quite suitable to the role, can result in a potential disaster for team members with different VO, Enneagram and CPP profiles. In such a situation, team collaboration and effectiveness are unlikely. Therefore, both consistencies as well as contradictions in the MP profile, as well as between the MP, VO and CPP profiles, are useful to explore.
During the feedback process, all findings should be linked to practical examples and current life challenges. The candidate should be allowed to do most of the talking, enabling them to understand and internalize the implications of the results. More than one feedback session may be required. Over time, the MP can also be retaken by an individual in order to establish whether certain challenges have been resolved. The practitioner always needs to protect the confidentiality of personal data.